As we discussed yesterday, here is the reference for an interesting article about the usefulness of Google Scholar.
Wilson, V. (2007) Evidence summary: a content analysis of Google Scholar: coverage varies by discipline and by database. Evidence based library and information practice 2(1), 134-136
I've scribbled a few notes on my copy on particular points I found relevant:
- Variation by subject re inclusion as compared to standard databases in the field – medicine does quite well (76%) though some subjects are as low as 10% (humanities in particular)
- Bias toward English-language publications
- Approximate 15-week (four-month) delay in uploading new articles (compared to PubMed and BioMed)
See you all soon, Louisa
