Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) are regarded as persistent; however, they are sometimes deleted. Deleted DOIs are an important issue not only for persistent access to scholarly content but also for bibliometrics, because they may cause problems in correctly identifying scholarly articles. However, little is known about how much of deleted DOIs and what causes them. We identified deleted DOIs by comparing the datasets of all Crossref DOIs on two different dates, investigated the number of deleted DOIs in the scholarly content along with the corresponding document types, and analyzed the factors that cause deleted DOIs. Using the proposed method, 708,282 deleted DOIs were identified. The majority corresponded to individual scholarly articles such as journal articles, proceedings articles, and book chapters. There were cases of many DOIs assigned to the same content, e.g., retracted journal articles and abstracts of international conferences. We show the publishers and academic societies which are the most common in deleted DOIs. In addition, the top cases of single scholarly content with a large number of deleted DOIs were revealed. The findings of this study are useful for citation analysis and altmetrics, as well as for avoiding deleted DOIs.
翻译:数字物体识别器(DOI)被认为具有持久性;但有时被删除;被删除的DOI不仅是持续访问学术内容的一个重要问题,而且也是一个重要问题,因为它们在正确识别学术文章方面可能造成问题;然而,对于有多少被删除的DOI及其原因知之甚少。我们通过比较两个不同日期的所有Crossref DOIs的数据集,调查了学术内容中被删除的DOI的数量以及相应的文件类型,并分析了导致删除DOI的因素。使用拟议方法,确定了708,282个被删除的DOI。大多数与个别学术文章如期刊文章、议事录文章和书章相对应,但许多被删除的DOIs被指定为同一内容的案例,例如:撤回的期刊文章和国际会议摘要。我们向被删除的DOIs展示了最常见的出版商和学术社团。此外,还披露了与大量被删除的DOIs相关的高级学术内容案例。本研究的结果有助于分析和避免DOIs被删除。