E-BOOKS IN ACADEMIC LIBRARIES: A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS BASED ON THE SCOPUS DATABASE
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a need to identify the use and impact of e-books in academic libraries. The study aims to map the bibliometric patterns of the research publications published on e-books in academic libraries on the Scopus Database. Objectives were to examine the authorship pattern, map the year-wise distribution of papers, determine the degree of author collaboration, identify citation trends, identify the most productive journals on the study topic, and map the keyword occurrence. A bibliometric analysis was carried out on research publications on the Scopus database, which discusses e-books in academic libraries. The search was performed without indicating a specific period. The search string was "E-books" AND "Academic Libraries" and it was searched through titles on 6th March 2025. Publish or Perish Software was used to extract the research publications from the Scopus database. Microsoft Excel and VOS Viewer applications were used for data analysis and visualization. By adhering to the PRISMA flow chart 48 research articles were selected for the study. The study revealed that the majority of the research articles were by multi-authors. The first research article on e-books in academic libraries was published in 2001. The years 2012 and 2015 have been the most productive years with the highest number of publications. There is a declining trend in the publications of e-books in academic libraries. The results indicate that there is a high degree of author collaboration. The most trending research topic is the usage and user attitudes toward e-books in academic libraries. The most cited research paper was single-authored with 195 citations. The authors from the United States of America, Canada, and the United Kingdom have contributed to the top five most cited research publications. The Journal "Library Collections, Acquisition and Technical Services" is the most productive and recognized journal with a higher average of citations per article. The terms "Academic Library" and "e-book" are mostly used keywords in the selected research articles. This assessment would be a valuable resource to the scientific community, funding agencies and policymakers. This study may help those who wish to map the bibliometric patterns of research articles.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.247 | 0.686 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it