Choice of import source
There are several import sources available in Pure, but which one to choose?
When registering a publication in Pure, a large part of the work is to register the authors and their affiliated organisations. It is possible to reduce the time spent registering by importing the publication from an online source. This will provide you with much of the bibliometric information, including the names of authors and organisations.
Some import sources have been developed to cover a specific field of study. A good example of this is PubMed. People who work in the NAT/TEK fields have traditionally used Web of Science, as this source has a high coverage of the technical disciplines.
In AU Pure, we work almost exclusively with Scopus. An important factor in our choice of import source is that we view Scopus metadata to be of better quality. In general, data from Scopus falls better in to place in Pure as the systems come from the same supplier and use the same data model. Scopus has a very high coverage of journals in all fields of study. If a publication has been published, in the vast majority of cases it can imported from Scopus. This means that you only have to search in one place.
A study from March 20211) shows that there are approx. 1% of journals in Web of Science that fall outside the journal coverage of Scopus. Therefore, there is no particular reason to use Web of Science and perhaps import metadata of a lower quality.
No matter how you choose to register your publications, or which import source you choose, the registration must meet the same quality standards.
1) Singh, V.K., Singh, P., Karmakar, M. et al. The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03948-5