Yeimer - to me, it's not the database that contains the journal - but the qualities of the individual journal itself i.e. it's history, impact factors, scope, editors, editorial board etc. If I am searching for specific articles on a specific topic - I prefer to use PubMed for it's wider full-text options and, for clinical topics, I really like the MeSH option.

Yeimer - to me, it's not the database that contains the journal - but the qualities of the individual journal itself i.e. it's history, impact factors, scope, editors, editorial board etc. If I am searching for specific articles on a specific topic - I prefer to use PubMed for it's wider full-text options and, for clinical topics, I really like the MeSH option.

Neither, as mentioned above by Dean! : )

Judge on a journal by journal basis.

Just being on Pubmed is not enough- and does not have to be on Pubmed if say it is a plant-science based or new journal.

Scopus is only from ELSEVIER's list of journals!

Now, you tell, which one you would recommend to another person?

Thanks,

in addition to the above answer, I can add:

Pubmed/Medline are publisher like Elseveir and Lippincott.

but SCOPUS, ISI, ERA are classified as indixed databases. They have certain conditions to accept journals in their data bases; thats why many universities and many Ranking systems in the world consider these indexes.

In my country, my university gives incentives for researchers who publish in ISI and ERA {Australian database, A & B} journals but not for SCOPUS or others. While other universities give incentive for publishing in scopus.

First of all, I appreciate the feedback of the distinguished professors. I'm almost done with my Ph.D. and I have a humble opinion as a rocky in the research world. As a start, I believe it is better to spread your idea online as long it is indexed in the  "Google scholar" data base. Later on, when you get the experience of being a better researcher and writer, go for the top notch journals and databases.Good luck and have a great day.

Hi,

It all depends on your area of research and specialized is your search. If you are a medical researcher, than I recommend using PubMed and then complete the search using the Science citation index  of the World of Science.

I agree that it depends on the area fo research. I intend to prefer Pubmed/Medline journals because it falls within my area of expertise and researchers from my area will use this as a primary source to search. Scopus would be a second option because it contains all the fields. 

I use both but find Scopus easier to use. There are also other good data bases such as Cochrane and Science Direct. Check with your librarian.   I agree with the other participants, it is the quality of the journal, impact factors, and whether the journal is in your area of expertise that matters.  Look at the topics that the journal publishes in, and their requirements if you wish to publish. Kerre

To me the quality of paper can not be judged by any parameters but it’s content which really have impac.

The yardsticks for comparison not there at all! PubMed for medicine and allied health sciences while scopus is for all fields. PubMed serves as a database as well as a publisher while Scopus is singly a database. To me, in case this question intended to say, if talking of medical-related and purpose of being a database (collapsing other factors), then I would suggest PubMed because of wider spread/publicity which in turn usually increase citation more than scopus. However, I go for both and including ISI (Web of Science) to make a choice for my paper. Each of these has different purpose and putting them together give you brilliant outcome.

Depends on situation and goal of publishing.