openalexR: An R-Tool for Collecting Bibliometric Data from OpenAlex

Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II

aria@unina.it

Bristol Myers Squibb

trang.le@bms.com

Università della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli

corrado.cuccurullo@unicampania.it

Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II

alessandra.belfiore@unina.it

University of Pennsylvania

yjchoe@sas.upenn.edu

Abstract

Bibliographic databases are indispensable sources of information on published literature. OpenAlex is an open-source collection of academic metadata that enable comprehensive bibliographic analyses (Priem, Piwowar, and Orr 2022). In this paper, we provide details on the implementation of openalexR, an R package to interface with the OpenAlex API. We present a general overview of its main functions and several detailed examples of its use. Following best API package practices, openalexR offers an intuitive interface for collecting information on different entities, including works, authors, institutions, sources, and concepts. openalexR exposes to the user different API parameters including filtering, searching, sorting, and grouping. This new open-source package is well-documented and available on CRAN.

Ammar, Waleed, Dirk Groeneveld, Chandra Bhagavatula, Iz Beltagy, Miles Crawford, Doug Downey, Jason Dunkelberger, et al. 2018. “Construction of the Literature Graph in Semantic Scholar.” arXiv Preprint arXiv:1805.02262.

Aria, Massimo. 2022. openalexR: Getting Bibliographic Records from ’OpenAlex’ Database Using ’DSL’ API.

Aria, Massimo, and Corrado Cuccurullo. 2017. “Bibliometrix: An r-Tool for Comprehensive Science Mapping Analysis.” Journal of Informetrics 11 (4): 959–75.

Belfiore, Alessandra, Angelo Salatino, and Francesco Osborne. 2022. “Characterising Research Areas in the Field of AI.” arXiv Preprint arXiv:2205.13471.

Chawla, Dalmeet Singh. 2017. “Unpaywall Finds Free Versions of Paywalled Papers.” Nature.

Chen, Chaomei. 2017. “Science Mapping: A Systematic Review of the Literature.” Journal of Data and Information Science 2 (2): 1–40. https://doi.org/doi:10.1515/jdis-2017-0006.

Csárdi, Gábor, Jim Hester, Hadley Wickham, Winston Chang, Martin Morgan, and Dan Tenenbaum. 2021. Remotes: R Package Installation from Remote Repositories, Including ’GitHub’. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=remotes.

Dallas, Tad, Alyssa-Lois Gehman, and Maxwell J Farrell. 2018. “Variable Bibliographic Database Access Could Limit Reproducibility.” BioScience 68 (8): 552–53.

Du, Caifan, Johanna Cohoon, Jason Priem, Heather Piwowar, Casey Meyer, and James Howison. 2021. “CiteAs: Better Software Through Sociotechnical Change for Better Software Citation.” Companion Publication of the 2021 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing.

Hendricks, Ginny, Dominika Tkaczyk, Jennifer Lin, and Patricia Feeney. 2020. “Crossref: The Sustainable Source of Community-Owned Scholarly Metadata.” Quantitative Science Studies 1 (1): 414–27.

Herzog, Christian, Daniel Hook, and Stacy Konkiel. 2020. “Dimensions: Bringing down Barriers Between Scientometricians and Data.” Quantitative Science Studies 1 (1): 387–95.

Hicks, Diana, Paul Wouters, Ludo Waltman, Sarah De Rijcke, and Ismael Rafols. 2015. “Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for Research Metrics.” Nature 520 (7548): 429–31.

Hook, Daniel W, Simon J Porter, and Christian Herzog. 2018. “Dimensions: Building Context for Search and Evaluation.” Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics 3: 23.

Kulkanjanapiban, Pachisa, and Tipawan Silwattananusarn. 2022. “Comparative Analysis of Dimensions and Scopus Bibliographic Data Sources: An Approach to University Research Productivity.” International Journal of Electrical & Computer Engineering (2088-8708) 12 (1).

Martı́n-Martı́n, Alberto, Mike Thelwall, Enrique Orduna-Malea, and Emilio Delgado López-Cózar. 2021. “Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: A Multidisciplinary Comparison of Coverage via Citations.” Scientometrics 126 (1): 871–906.

McWeeny, Sean, June Choe, and Elizabeth S. Norton. 2021. SnowGlobe: An Iterative Search Tool for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/U25RN.

McWeeny, Sean, Soujin Choi, June Choe, Alexander LaTourrette, Megan Y. Roberts, and Elizabeth S. Norton. 2022. “Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) as a Kindergarten Predictor of Future Reading in English: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Reading Research Quarterly 57 (4): 1187–1211. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.467.

Pedersen, Thomas Lin. 2022a. Ggraph: An Implementation of Grammar of Graphics for Graphs and Networks. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ggraph.

———. 2022b. Tidygraph: A Tidy API for Graph Manipulation. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=tidygraph.

Priem, Jason, Heather Piwowar, and Richard Orr. 2022. “OpenAlex: A Fully-Open Index of Scholarly Works, Authors, Venues, Institutions, and Concepts.” arXiv Preprint arXiv:2205.01833. http://altmetrics.org/manifesto.

Priem, Jason, Dario Taraborelli, Paul Groth, and Cameron Neylon. 2011. “Altmetrics: A Manifesto.”

Siddaway, Andy P., Alex M. Wood, and Larry V. Hedges. 2019. “How to Do a Systematic Review: A Best Practice Guide for Conducting and Reporting Narrative Reviews, Meta-Analyses, and Meta-Syntheses.” Annual Review of Psychology 70 (1): 747–70. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102803.

Singh, Vivek Kumar, Prashasti Singh, Mousumi Karmakar, Jacqueline Leta, and Philipp Mayr. 2021. “The Journal Coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A Comparative Analysis.” Scientometrics 126 (6): 5113–42.

Sinha, Arnab, Zhihong Shen, Yang Song, Hao Ma, Darrin Eide, Bo-June Hsu, and Kuansan Wang. 2015. “An Overview of Microsoft Academic Service (Mas) and Applications.” In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web, 243–46.

Van Eck, Nees Jan, Ludo Waltman, Vincent Larivière, and Cassidy Sugimoto. 2018. “Crossref as a New Source of Citation Data: A Comparison with Web of Science and Scopus.” CWTS Blog 17.

Van Noorden, Richard. 2013. “Scientists Join Journal Editors to Fight Impact-Factor Abuse.” Nature News Blog 16.

Visser, Martijn, Nees Jan van Eck, and Ludo Waltman. 2021. “Large-Scale Comparison of Bibliographic Data Sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic.” Quantitative Science Studies 2 (1): 20–41.

Wais, Kamil. 2016. “Gender Prediction Methods Based on First Names with genderizeR.” R J. 8 (1): 17.

Waltman, Ludo, and Vincent Larivière. 2020. “Special Issue on Bibliographic Data Sources.” Quantitative Science Studies. MIT Press One Rogers Street, Cambridge, MA 02142-1209, USA journals-info ….

Wang, K et al. 2019. “A Review of Microsoft Academic Services for Science of Science Studies. Front. Big Data 2, 45 (2019).”

Wang, Kuansan, Zhihong Shen, Chiyuan Huang, Chieh-Han Wu, Yuxiao Dong, and Anshul Kanakia. 2020. “Microsoft Academic Graph: When Experts Are Not Enough.” Quantitative Science Studies 1 (1): 396–413.

Wanyama, Seperia B, Ronald W McQuaid, and Markus Kittler. 2022. “Where You Search Determines What You Find: The Effects of Bibliographic Databases on Systematic Reviews.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 25 (3): 409–22.

Wickham, Hadley. 2022. Httr: Tools for Working with URLs and HTTP. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=httr.

Wickham, Hadley, Jim Hester, Winston Chang, and Jennifer Bryan. 2022. Devtools: Tools to Make Developing r Packages Easier. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=devtools.

Winter, David J. 2017. “Rentrez: An r Package for the NCBI eUtils API.” PeerJ Preprints.

Wohlin, Claes. 2014. “Guidelines for Snowballing in Systematic Literature Studies and a Replication in Software Engineering.” In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering. EASE ’14. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2601248.2601268.