Measuring the quality of scientific references in Wikipedia: an analysis of more than 115M citations to over 800,000 scientific articles
J. M. Nicholson, A. Uppala, M. Sieber, P. Grabitz, M. Mordaunt, S. Rife
Abstract
Wikipedia is a widely used online reference work which cites hundreds of thousands of scientific articles across its entries. The quality of these citations has not been previously measured, and such measurements have a bearing on the reliability and quality of the scientific portions of this reference work. Using a novel technique, a massive database of qualitatively described citations, and machine learning algorithms, we analyzed 1,923,575 Wikipedia articles which cited a total of 841,821 scientific articles, and found that most cited articles (58%) are uncited or untested by subsequent studies, while the remainder show a wide variability in contradicting or supporting evidence (2-40%).View Full Text
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Wikipedia as a gateway to biomedical research: The relative distribution and use of citations in the English Wikipedia
L. A. Maggio, J. Willinsky, … T. Dong·bioRxiv·Jul 18, 2017
- How accurate are citations of frequently cited papers in biomedical literature?
V. Pavlovic, T. Weissgerber, … CITE investigators·bioRxiv·Dec 10, 2020
- Scientometric correlates of high-quality reference lists in ecological papers
S. Mammola, A. Martinez, … F. Chichorro·bioRxiv·Mar 27, 2020
- Citation needed?Wikipedia bibliometrics during the first waveof the COVID-19 pandemic.
O. Benjakob, R. Aviram, J. A. Sobel·bioRxiv·Mar 1, 2021
- COVID-19 research in Wikipedia
G. Colavizza·bioRxiv·May 10, 2020
- The impact factor fallacy
F. M. Paulus, N. Cruz, S. Krach·bioRxiv·Nov 15, 2017