Metadata and metadata schemes in open access research resources
https://doi.org/10.33186/1027-3689-2026-5-146-163
Abstract
The robust, standardized metadata generated strictly under the scheme make research findings discoverable and understandable for users and information retrieval systems. Acquiring high-quality metadata for open access scientific resources and their harmonization with schemes and standards enhance visibility and citation of research findings, retrieval performance, proliferation of research, cooperation, and thematic structures studies. The goal of this study is to identify the spectrum of metadata and metadata schemes as reflected in the open access resources (ROA). For this purpose, the following problems were solved: 1) the list of fields of metadata, schemes and standards was examined, 2) the key elements of metadata for publications indexed in the largest ROA (Google Scholar, OpenAlex, Dimensions and Lens, and in the Russian Resources RISC and Cobalt) were identified. The author concludes on the prospects for the discovery resources and scientific information processes and on the need to consider evolving functionality, increasing discoverability of metadata accuracy and completeness. Elimination of record ambiguity with identifiers and record standards, linking metadata in different resources, introduction of extra metadata field to assess research results and to classify in the ROA classification, will enable relevant information retrieval and re duce document management in various information retrieval systems.
Keywords
About the Author
N. S. RedkinaRussian Federation
Natalya S. Redkina – Dr. Sc. (Pedagogy), Chief Researcher, Head, Open Science Studies
Novosibirsk
References
1. Plan S: Annual Review. 2024. URL: https://www.coalition-s.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Plan-S-2024-annual-review.pdf (accessed: 05.11.2025).
2. Shrai`berg Ia. L. Sovremenny`e tendentcii razvitiia tcifrovizatcii obshchestva: nauchnoobrazovatel`naia i bibliotechno-informatcionnaia sreda : monografiia. Moskva : INFRA-M, 2024. 664 s. DOI 10.12737/2155873.
3. Shrai`berg Ia. L., Vakhrushev M. V., Goncharov M. V. Otkry`ty`i` dostup: istoriia, sovremennoe sostoianie i put` k otkry`toi` nauke: uchebnik. Moskva : Lan`, 2020. 168 s.
4. Red`kina N. S. Resursy` otkry`togo dostupa i instrumenty` dlia opredeleniia trendov razvitiia nauki // Nauchny`e i tekhnicheskie biblioteki. 2025; (4):90–113. DOI 10.33186/1027-3689-2025-4-90-113.
5. Quirós D., Joaquina L., Ortega J. L. Comparing Bibliographic Descriptions in Seven Free Access Databases. 27th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators (STI 2023). 2023. DOI 10.55835/6436c590b3340c364be5b2c7.
6. Alperin J. P., Portenoy J., Demes K. [et al.] An analysis of the suitability of OpenAlex for bibliometric analyses. arXiv. 2024. April 26. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.17663 (accessed: 03.10.2025). DOI 10.48550/arXiv.2404.17663.
7. GOST R ISO 15489-1-2019. Natcional`ny`i` standart Rossii`skoi` Federatcii. Sistema standartov po informatcii, bibliotechnomu i izdatel`skomu delu. Informatciia i dokumentatciia. Upravlenie dokumentami. Chast` 1. Poniatiia i printcipy` (utv. Prikazom Rosstandarta ot 26.03.2019 N 101-st). Moskva, Standartinform, 2019. 24 s.
8. Elouataoui W., El Alaoui I., Gahi Y. Metadata Quality Dimensions for Big Data Use Cases. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Big Data, Modelling and Machine Learning. 2021. 1: 488-495. DOI 10.5220/0010737400003101.
9. Buttrick A., Praetzellis M. Advancing Metadata Quality: An Open Call to Collaborate / FORCE 11. 2024. October 8. DOI 10.54900/y7yyq-2rw17.
10. GOST R ISO 15489-1-2019. Natcional`ny`i` standart Rossii`skoi` Federatcii. Sistema standartov po informatcii, bibliotechnomu i izdatel`skomu delu. Informatciia i dokumentatciia. Upravlenie dokumentami. Chast` 1. Moskva, Standartinform, 2019. 28 s.
11. Neguliaev E. A. Universal`ny`e skhemy` metadanny`kh i zadacha opisaniia veb-resursov // Bibliosfera. 2006. 1:43-54.
12. Bik Dzh., Olson KH. E`. Sravnenie skhem metadanny`kh: AACR2+ ili skhema metadanny`kh ICDL. URL: https://www.ifla.org/past-wlic/2011/80-beak-ru.pdf (data obrashcheniia: 05.11.2025).
13. Jones M. B., O’Brien M., Mecum B. [et al.] Ecological Metadata Language version 2.2.0. KNB Data Repository. 2019. DOI 10.5063/F11834T2.
14. Shi J., Nason M., Tullney M., Alperin J. Identifying Metadata Quality Issues Across Cultures. College & Research Libraries. 2025. 86 (1): 101. DOI 10.5860/crl.86.1.101.
15. Korzec K., Tkaczyk D. Meet Six Winners of the First Ever Crossref Metadata Awards / Metadata Blog. May 7, 2025. DOI 10.64000/xh94q-w7335.
16. Van Eck N. J., Waltman L. Crossref as a Source of Open Bibliographic Metadata. MetaArXiv. 2025. May 12. DOI 10.31222/osf.io/smxe5_v2.
17. Li K., Dobreski B., Busch M. How are library cataloging metadata used differently over time: a large-scale quantitative analysis of the Library of Congress catalog. Journal of Documentation. 2025. 81(2): 385-402. DOI 10.1108/JD-08-2024-0199.
18. Lide D. R., Kehiaian H. V. CRC handbook of thermophysical and thermochemical data. CRC Press. 2020. 518 p.
19. Barnett A. Spelling Errors in Health and Medical Abstracts: An Observational Analysis from 2008 to 2024. OSF Preprints. 2025. July 29. DOI 10.31219/osf.io/v8n9q_v2.
20. Amdekar M. S. Scholarly Metadata as Trust Signals: Opportunities for Journal Editors. Science Editor. 2024. November 6. DOI 10.36591/se-4704-10.
Review
For citations:
Redkina N.S. Metadata and metadata schemes in open access research resources. Scientific and Technical Libraries. 2026;1(5):146-163. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.33186/1027-3689-2026-5-146-163
JATS XML
































