This paper presents an analysis of the Overton policy document database, describing the makeup of materials indexed and the nature in which they cite academic literature. We report on various aspects of the data, including growth, geographic spread, language representation, the range of policy source types included, and the availability of citation links in documents. Longitudinal analysis over established journal category schemes is used to reveal the scale and disciplinary focus of citations and determine the feasibility of developing field-normalized citation indicators. We examine how well self-reported funding outcomes collected by UK funders corresponds to data indexed in the Overton database, and if peer-review assessment of impact as measured by the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF) 2014 correlates with derived citation metrics. Our findings show that for some research topics, such as health, economics, social care and the environment, Overton contains a core set of policy documents with sufficient citation linkage to academic literature to support various citation analysis that may be informative in research evaluation, impact assessment, and policy review. The data indexed in Overton agrees with that collected via self-reporting of funding outcomes, and correlates with peer-review assessment of impact in some disciplines.
翻译:本文件分析了Overton政策文件数据库,介绍了编入索引的材料的构成以及它们引用学术文献的性质。我们报告了数据的各个方面,包括增长、地理分布、语言代表性、包括的政策来源类型范围以及文件中引用链接的提供情况。对既定日记分类办法的纵向分析用于披露引文的规模和纪律重点,并确定制定外地标准化引文指标的可行性。我们审查了联合王国供资者收集的自我报告的供资结果与在Overton数据库中编入索引的数据的匹配程度,以及2014年联合王国研究英才框架衡量的对影响的同行审查评估是否与衍生的引文指标相关。我们的调查结果显示,对于一些研究专题,如卫生、经济、社会护理和环境,Overton载有一套核心政策文件,与学术文献有充分的引文联系,以支持在研究评价、影响评估和政策审查方面可能具有信息的各种引文分析。在Overton编制的数据与通过自我报告供资结果收集的数据相一致,并与某些学科的影响同行审查评估相关。