You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Copy file name to clipboardExpand all lines: README.md
+27-23Lines changed: 27 additions & 23 deletions
Display the source diff
Display the rich diff
Original file line number
Diff line number
Diff line change
@@ -231,14 +231,16 @@ An increasing number of universities, research organisations and funders have la
231
231
232
232
#### Gathering DOIs representing scholarly publications
233
233
234
-
DOIs have become essential for referencing scholarly publications, and thus many digital libraries and institutional databases keep track of these persistent identifiers. For the sake of this vignette, instead of starting with a pre-defined set of publications originating from these sources, we simply generate a random sample of 50 DOIs registered with Crossref by using the [rcrossref package](https://github.com/ropensci/rcrossref).
234
+
DOIs have become essential for referencing scholarly publications, and thus many digital libraries and institutional databases keep track of these persistent identifiers. For the sake of this vignette, instead of starting with a pre-defined set of publications originating from these sources, we simply generate a random sample of 50 articles published in the Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology from Crossref with the [rcrossref package](https://github.com/ropensci/rcrossref).
235
235
236
236
237
237
```r
238
238
library(dplyr)
239
239
library(rcrossref)
240
240
# get a random sample of DOIs and metadata describing these works
241
-
random_dois<-rcrossref::cr_r(sample=50)
241
+
random_dois<-rcrossref::cr_r(filter=list(
242
+
issn="2330-1643", type="journal-article"
243
+
), sample=50)
242
244
```
243
245
244
246
#### Calling Unpaywall
@@ -262,15 +264,15 @@ oa_df
262
264
#> doi best_oa_location oa_locations oa_locations_em… data_standard is_oa
How did Unpaywall find those Open Access full-texts, which were characterized as best matches, and how are these OA types distributed over publication types?
299
+
How did Unpaywall find those Open Access full-texts, and which were characterized as best matches?
298
300
299
301
300
302
```r
301
303
oa_df %>%
302
304
filter(is_oa==TRUE) %>%
303
-
select(best_oa_location, oa_status, genre) %>%
304
-
tidyr::unnest(best_oa_location) %>%
305
-
group_by(oa_status, evidence, genre) %>%
305
+
tidyr::unnest(oa_locations) %>%
306
+
group_by(oa_status, evidence, is_best) %>%
306
307
summarise(Articles= n()) %>%
307
308
arrange(desc(Articles))
308
-
#> # A tibble: 6 x 4
309
-
#> # Groups: oa_status, evidence [5]
310
-
#> oa_status evidence genre Articles
311
-
#> <chr> <chr> <chr> <int>
312
-
#> 1 bronze open (via free pdf) journal-article 6
313
-
#> 2 gold open (via page says license) journal-article 2
314
-
#> 3 gold oa journal (via publisher name) component 1
315
-
#> 4 green oa repository (semantic scholar lookup) journal-article 1
316
-
#> 5 green oa repository (semantic scholar lookup) monograph 1
317
-
#> 6 hybrid open (via page says license) journal-article 1
309
+
#> # A tibble: 9 x 4
310
+
#> # Groups: oa_status, evidence [8]
311
+
#> oa_status evidence is_best Articles
312
+
#> <chr> <chr> <lgl> <int>
313
+
#> 1 bronze open (via free article) TRUE 11
314
+
#> 2 green oa repository (via OAI-PMH title and first author … TRUE 4
315
+
#> 3 green oa repository (via OAI-PMH doi match) TRUE 2
316
+
#> 4 hybrid open (via crossref license) FALSE 2
317
+
#> 5 hybrid open (via page says license) TRUE 2
318
+
#> 6 green oa repository (via OAI-PMH doi match) FALSE 1
319
+
#> 7 hybrid oa repository (via OAI-PMH doi match) FALSE 1
320
+
#> 8 hybrid oa repository (via OAI-PMH title and first author … FALSE 1
Copy file name to clipboardExpand all lines: vignettes/intro.Rmd
+7-6Lines changed: 7 additions & 6 deletions
Original file line number
Diff line number
Diff line change
@@ -132,13 +132,15 @@ An increasing number of universities, research organisations and funders have la
132
132
133
133
#### Gathering DOIs representing scholarly publications
134
134
135
-
DOIs have become essential for referencing scholarly publications, and thus many digital libraries and institutional databases keep track of these persistent identifiers. For the sake of this vignette, instead of starting with a pre-defined set of publications originating from these sources, we simply generate a random sample of 50 DOIs registered with Crossref by using the [rcrossref package](https://github.com/ropensci/rcrossref).
135
+
DOIs have become essential for referencing scholarly publications, and thus many digital libraries and institutional databases keep track of these persistent identifiers. For the sake of this vignette, instead of starting with a pre-defined set of publications originating from these sources, we simply generate a random sample of 50 articles published in the Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology from Crossref with the [rcrossref package](https://github.com/ropensci/rcrossref).
136
136
137
137
```{r, message=FALSE}
138
138
library(dplyr)
139
139
library(rcrossref)
140
140
# get a random sample of DOIs and metadata describing these works
141
-
random_dois <- rcrossref::cr_r(sample = 50)
141
+
random_dois <- rcrossref::cr_r(filter = list(
142
+
issn = "2330-1643", type = "journal-article"
143
+
), sample = 50)
142
144
```
143
145
144
146
#### Calling Unpaywall
@@ -168,14 +170,13 @@ oa_df %>%
168
170
arrange(desc(Articles))
169
171
```
170
172
171
-
How did Unpaywall find those Open Access full-texts, which were characterized as best matches, and how are these OA types distributed over publication types?
173
+
How did Unpaywall find those Open Access full-texts, and which were characterized as best matches?
0 commit comments