scopus research article search

UNC Libraries
HSL Academic Process
Searching Scopus
Using Scopus

Searching Scopus: Using Scopus

Created by health science librarians.

About Scopus

Basic search, advanced search, author name search, citation searching, creating alerts, exporting items to citation managers, analyzing results, create bibliography.

Comparison between Scopus and Web of Science
Journal Metrics
Helpful Resources and Tutorials

Scopus is an abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature and web sources with tools to track, analyze, and visualize research. Scopus provides access to a broad portfolio of peer-reviewed content from around the world.

Scopus includes the records from the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, among other included sources. Scopus uses four broad subject areas: Physical Sciences , Health Sciences , Social Sciences, and Life Sciences .

Scopus allows users to:

Search for articles, conference proceedings,trade publications, and book chapters on a topic
Find author information, such as H-index, and lists of publications
Locate Impact metrics for a journal title using SNIP, SJR, and CiteScore
Perform citation searches on known articles
Identify promising journals in which to publish
Match an organization with its research output
Locate potential collaborators or subject experts
Manage your impact with your ORCID ID
Set Citation Alerts

Search Form

Below is the Scopus search screen. Enter your first search term into the search field. If you have more than one concept to your search, select "Add Search Field" to add additional search fields, or conduct separate searches and combine them later using the "Search" button.

Scopus does NOT have MeSH terms or other subject headings on which to search.

Scopus defaults to searching an article's Title, Abstract and Keywords. You can change this in Advanced (see the tab to the left for information on Advanced searching).

Adapted from Rush University Library's "Scopus User Guide"

On the Advanced search form, you can create a search using field codes, proximity operators, or boolean operators to narrow the scope of the search.

To create an advanced search, Click "Advanced Search" from the main search page

To search for keywords in an article's title or abstract, type in TITLE-ABS before your search terms. Be sure to use parentheses! For example, this is correct: (TITLE-ABS( children OR pediatrics)) but this is not correct: TITLE-ABS children OR pediatrics

When doing a Boolean search, Scopus insists that parentheses be used correctly. If you get a message about a Syntax Error, check your (( )).

Scopus needs Boolean operators (AND, OR) to be capitalized. To exclude in Scopus, you must use AND NOT (not just 'NOT').

Scopus is a great place to look for information about a particular author's published works. You can start your search for information on Scopus's main search page by clicking "Authors." While Scopus is a compilation of peer-reviewed articles, it is not comprehensive, so keep in mind that you will only see information about the articles that have been indexed into Scopus.

Type in the author's last name, and first name if it will be helpful to locate them. It is often a good idea to put an Affiliation as well.

The author's information will appear. To see all their published work that has been indexed into Scopus, click the box in front of their name and then click "Show documents."

If you are checking on your own citations and notice that you have more than one listing, click "Request to merge authors."

If this is your information and there are multiple BOXES for your name, you can merge them by clicking the "Request to merge authors" link and following the steps.

For a visual representation of this author's work, click the box for All, then "View citation information."

Scopus Advanced Search Video Tutorial

To find citation counts in Scopus

Go to the Scopus database
Search by the document's title
In the results list, look in the far-right hand column for the citation count.
To see what documents cited the document, click on the citation count.

By registering as a Scopus user, you are able to create search, document, and author alert s to stay up-to-date at your desired frequency. Use these alerts to receive email notices when new documents are loaded on Scopus. From the Alerts page, you can create alerts, view the latest results for an alert, edit alerts, and delete alerts. There is no limit on the number of alerts you can create.

A Search alert is a saved search that you can schedule to run at certain intervals. If any new results are found, you will receive an email with the first 25 results and a link into Scopus to access all new results. You must be logged in to set an alert or work with your saved alerts.

To set a new search alert:

From the D ocument Search page, perform a new search. The Search results page opens.
From the search results page, click Set alert . The Set Alert pop-up appears.
Set the frequency and day of week to start alerts.

To set an author alert:

From the Author page, perform a new search. The Search results page opens.
From the search results page, click an author's name. The author details page opens.
From the author details page, click Get citation alerts . The Set Alert Author Citation Alert pop-up opens.

To set a document alert:

From the Document search page, perform a new search. The Search results page opens.
From the search results page, click an document's name. The Document details page opens.
From the Document details page, click Set citation alerts . The Set Document Citation Alert pop-up opens.

To export items to SciWheel, EndNote, Zotero, or another citation manager, look in the grey bar (found at the top of your search results) for the words "RIS Export." Note that you can also email citations (with links) to yourself in this bar.

You can export or email individual citations using the links in this bar, or you can save citations into a List and export/email the entire list at once by using the List function. See "Saving Items in a List" in the tabs to the left for more information.

The drop-down arrow next to "RIS Export" provides options for what information you'd like to export. We recommend checking of all boxes so that all information is sent.

>Analyze Search Results

Scopus offers several built-in functions for analyzing search results. You can find these options here:

The analysis tools provide a summary view of aspects of the search results, such as counts of publications:

By document source (ex. Journal Title)
By affiliation (author organization)
By document type (ie. journal article, book chapter, etc.)
And several other criterion

With Scopus, you can create a bibliography of articles on the fly.

1. Select the articles in your search set that you would like to include in your bibliography. You can do this by checking off the boxes of the articles you want, or by using the "add to list" feature to just add those articles you want. When you add the articles to the list, your list will open. From there, select all.

select articles to include and click on create bibliography

2. Click on the three dots at the top right that indicate "more menu options". Select the option "Create Bibliography".

3. Select which format you want (HTML or text) and select the appropriate citation style. Click on "Create Bibliography".

Next: Comparison between Scopus and Web of Science >>
Last Updated: Mar 19, 2024 8:05 AM
URL: https://guides.lib.unc.edu/scopus

Search & Find

E-Research by Discipline
More Search & Find

Places & Spaces

Places to Study
Book a Study Room
Printers, Scanners, & Computers
More Places & Spaces
Borrowing & Circulation
Request a Title for Purchase
Schedule Instruction Session
More Services

Support & Guides

Course Reserves
Research Guides
Citing & Writing
More Support & Guides
Mission Statement
Diversity Statement
Staff Directory
Job Opportunities
Give to the Libraries
News & Exhibits
Reckoning Initiative
More About Us

Search This Site
Privacy Policy
Accessibility
Give Us Your Feedback
208 Raleigh Street CB #3916
Chapel Hill, NC 27515-8890
919-962-1053

Scopus LibGuide: Searching Scopus

Become a registered user
Searching Scopus
Author profile
Affiliation profile
Help & Support

In Scopus you can search by Documents, Authors or Affiliations. For details of the Author and Affiliation search please see the Author and Affiliation tabs.

Document search

Documents include journal articles, book chapters, conference proceedings, articles in press and data papers. Follow the steps below to learn how to perform a basic document search:

By default, Scopus will search in the Article title, Abstract and Keywords of documents
You can specify in which fields to search using the drop-down menu [2]
Use the +Add search field [3] option to add additional fields
Each new search field is combined using the Boolean operators AND, OR, and NOT [4]
Select Add date range [5] to either select a publication date range or to specify an "added to Scopus" date range
To see a complete list of advanced field codes, select Advanced document search [6]
Your Search History is displayed with the option to Set Alert [7] to notify you by email of new search results in Scopus that match that search
Select More [8] to save an important query or to delete a query
To combine queries from your history, choose two or more searches and select Combine queries [9]

Document results page

Editing your search, saving your search and setting alerts

Saving your search and setting up alerts [1]
Quickly review or edit your search from the top of the page [2]
By default, the search results are sorted by date. Use the ‘Sort by’ drop-down menu to sort in a different order. [3]

Refine your results [4] From the left-hand menu, you can:

Search within your results
Author name
Open Access type (learn more about the Open Access filter below)
Subject area
Publication stage
Affiliation
Funding sponsor

Registered users can sign in to:

Save searches
Set up alerts to be notified when new documents are added to Scopus that match this search
Learn how to become a registered user

Export results

Export selected search results [5] to various file types, reference managers and platforms :

RIS format (for import into EndNote

Analyze search results

Analyze Search Results button [6]

Use this feature to gain further insights into any list of document results.

Search Tips

Search Tips in Scopus

loose phrase, use double quotation marks
“heart attack” will search for documents where heart and attack appear together
asterisk is a wildcard
“criminal* insan*” finds criminally insane and criminal insanity.
exact phrase, enclose the phrase in braces { }

Note: {heart-attack} and {heart attack} return different results, as the first will search for results that contain a hyphen between heart and attack

Discover more search tips in the Support Center A full guide to boolean and proximity operators, loose and exact phrases, special characters, and other search tips.

Secondary documents

Scopus also features non-Scopus references, called ‘secondary documents’, which are not indexed in our database for three possible reasons:

They are retrieved from the references or citations of the documents that are covered by Scopus
Scopus is unable to match documents with certainty due to incomplete or incorrect data
There is missing content

To view these non-Scopus references, click ‘S econdary documents ’ above your search results.

Learn more about secondary documents

Cited reference search

Scopus provides the ability to search the list of cited references in articles, books, etc. If the reference which you are starting with is very relevant to your research, other related publications have probably cited references that are also relevant to your research. Cited reference searching is a useful extension to your standard keyword search.

Learn how to perform a cited reference search

Open Access filters

Refine your results [4]

On the document details page, you can filter by Open Access types, including:

All open access
Gold: Documents that are in journals that only publish open access
Hybrid Gold: Documents that are in journals that provide authors the choice of publishing open access
Bronze: Published version of record or manuscript accepted for publication; the publisher has chosen to provide temporary or permanent free access
Green: Published version or manuscript accepted for publication, available at the repository
<< Previous: Become a registered user
Next: Author profile >>
Last Updated: Feb 28, 2024 7:45 AM
URL: https://elsevier.libguides.com/Scopus

All Solutions

Expertly curated abstract & citation database

Your brilliance, connected.

Scopus uniquely combines a comprehensive, expertly curated abstract and citation database with enriched data and linked scholarly literature across a wide variety of disciplines.

Scopus quickly finds relevant and authoritative research, identifies experts and provides access to reliable data, metrics and analytical tools. Be confident in progressing research, teaching or research direction and priorities — all from one database and with one subscription.

Speak with us about your organization's needs

Scopus indexes content from more than 25,000 active titles and 7,000 publishers—all rigorously vetted and selected by an independent review board.

Learn more about Scopus content coverage

Download the fact sheet

2021 CiteScore metrics are available on our free layer of Scopus.com .

Learn more about CiteScore metrics

Academic Institutions

Scopus is designed to serve the information needs of researchers, educators, students, administrators and librarians across the entire academic community.

Government & Funding Agencies

Agencies and government bodies can rely on Scopus to inform their overall strategic direction, identify funding resources, measure researcher performance and more.

Research & Development

Scopus helps industry researchers track market innovations, identify key contributors and collaborators, and develop competitive benchmarking.

How Scopus works

Scopus indexes content that is rigorously vetted and selected by an independent review board of experts in their fields. The rich metadata architecture on which Scopus is built connects people, published ideas and institutions.

Using sophisticated tools and analytics, Scopus generates precise citation results, detailed researcher profiles, and insights that drive better decisions, actions and outcomes.

Discover how Scopus works

What our customers say

Many of today’s research questions have to do with public health, particularly with public policy and informatics. This creates an overlap between computer science, informatics and health sciences ... having a database as inclusive and interdisciplinary as Scopus is invaluable to us.

— Bruce Abbott, Health Sciences Librarian, University of California, Davis Health Care (USA)

Read the full customer story

Scopus really plays a vital role in helping our researchers, particularly early investigators and people who are getting ready to become early-career postgraduates, better understand the scholarly communications landscape.

— Emily Glenn, Associate Dean, University of Nebraska Medical Center Library (USA) Read the full customer story

When it comes to measuring success, you can’t compare other products to Scopus — no other output metrics offer the same kind of depth and coverage ... faculty, department chairs, college deans, they are always amazed when they discover what’s possible.

— Hector R. Perez-Gilbe, Research Librarian for the Health Sciences, University of California, Irvine (USA) Read the full customer story

Why choose Scopus

Scopus brings together superior data quality and coverage, sophisticated analytics and advanced technology in one solution that is ready to combat predatory publishing, optimize analytic powers and researcher workflows, and empower better decision making.

See why you should choose Scopus

Other helpful resources

To learn more about using and administering Scopus, how to contact us and to request corrections to Scopus profiles and content, please visit our support center .

To find Scopus fact sheets, case studies, user guides, title lists and more, please visit our resource center .

Elsevier.com visitor survey

We are always looking for ways to improve customer experience on Elsevier.com. We would like to ask you for a moment of your time to fill in a short questionnaire, at the end of your visit . If you decide to participate, a new browser tab will open so you can complete the survey after you have completed your visit to this website. Thanks in advance for your time.

Scopus: Access and use Support Center

To post social content, you must have a display name. The page will refresh upon submission. Any pending input will be lost.

Support Center

How can I best use the Advanced search?

An advanced search allows you to enter complex search queries using field codes, boolean and proximity operators to narrow the scope of your search.

Use boolean operators to combine different search queries and proximity operators to find words near/within a specified distance of each other.

Boolean operators - OR, AND, AND NOT

Rules for using Boolean operators:

AND NOT e.g., KEY(mouse AND NOT cat OR dog) is interpreted as KEY((mouse) AND NOT (cat OR dog))
AND NOT should always be used at the end of the query.
To search for a specific phrase, enclose the terms in double quotes (" ") or for an exact match use braces ({}).

Proximity operators - W/ n , PRE/ n

You can choose between two Proximity operators to find words within a certain distance from each other: Pre/ n specifies a word order whereas W/ n does not.

Tips for proximity operators:

You can search for a term in a specific field by entering the field code in your advanced search.

The search TITLE-ABS-KEY(prion disease) would return documents where the terms appear in the title, abstract or keywords.
The search INDEXTERMS(prion disease) would return documents with the indexing term “prion disease”.
Not using a field code, e.g. (heart attack) , is the same as searching ALL(heart attack) .

There are only a limited number of field codes available to use on the Document search form.

Not all documents contain all fields, so searching for specific fields could prevent some articles from appearing in your search results.
You can enter field codes in upper or lowercase, but make sure to use the correct field code spelling (including hyphens).

All available field codes

Add authors or affiliations to an Advanced search

You can search for and add author names or affiliations to your search from the Advanced search form.

If you know the unique author identifier / affiliation identifier you want to search for, you can enter it directly in the Advanced search form using the AU-ID / AF-ID field code.
When using AUTHOR-NAME ( john AND smith ) , the search is looking for documents having both john and smith as a single author. If you are looking for a larger set of results, the more appropriate search thread would be AUTHOR-NAME ( john ) AND AUTHOR-NAME ( smith ) , as this search looks for both names anywhere within a document.
FOR AUTHORS: On the Make Author or Affiliation Selection page, enter the author's last name and, if available, the first name or initial. Select 'Show exact matches only' to find authors that match exactly the name you entered in the Author Last Name and Initials or First Name fields.
FOR AFFILIATIONS: In the Affiliation field, enter your affiliation search criteria, such as the affiliation name and location.
Select the search icon. A second Scopus page opens providing author search results.
Select individual check boxes of author names/affiliations that you want to include in your Advanced search.
Select 'All' to select all authors from the results list.
Select 'Select page' to select all authors/affiliations on the current page of results.
Select a selected check box to remove that author/affiliation from the selection.
Select 'Add to search' to add selected authors/affiliations to your Advanced search. The Advanced search form updates with the author search field code.

Find authors in references

You can use the REFAUTH field in conjunction with the REF field to find reference authors.

Find affiliations in references

A document can contain many references and may contain more than one affiliation. When you search for affiliations (AFFIL field) or references (REF field), you can specify if you want all of your search terms to be found in the same reference or affiliation.

There are two ways of searching for phrases, an exact search and a loose/approximate phrase, depending on how exact a match you want to find.

Loose/approximate phrases

Double quotation marks are important when searching for a loose/approximate phrase.

Loose phrase: TITLE-ABS-KEY( "heart attack") searches for documents where heart attack appear together in the title, abstract, or keywords.
Not a loose phrase: TITLE-ABS-KEY( heart attack) searches for documents where heart and attack appear together or separately in the title, abstract, or keywords.
Dots and hyphens are treated as intentional. When a dot/hyphen is used, it is ignored and the search terms are treated as a loose phrase
heart-attack or heart.attack is searched as "heart attack"
Wildcards work: "criminal* liab*" finds criminally liable and criminal liability .
Plurals and spelling variants are included: heart attack includes heart attacks , anesthesia includes anaesthesia .
Double quotation marks can be used to search specifically for stop words and special characters: "crocodiles with alligators" will return results such as: Crocodiles with alligators are among the largest reptiles .
title-abs-key (*/art) is searched as title-abs-key(art)
abs(iwv-*) is searched as abs(iwv)

Exact phrase

To find documents that contain an exact phrase, enclose the phrase in braces: {oyster toadfish} .

RESULT: This includes any stop words , spaces, and punctuation which you included in the braces. For example:

{heart-attack} and {heart attack} will return different results because the dash is included.
Wildcards are searched as actual characters, e.g., {health care?} returns results such as: Who pays for health care?

The following error messages alert you to problems with your Advanced search.

Was this answer helpful?

Thank you for your feedback, it will help us serve you better. If you require assistance, please scroll down and use one of the contact options to get in touch.

Help us to help you:

Thank you for your feedback!

Why was this answer not helpful?
It was hard to understand / follow.
It did not answer my question.
The solution did not work.
There was a mistake in the answer.
Feel free to leave any comments below: Please enter your feedback to submit this form

How do I search in Scopus?
How to use advanced search tutorial
Scopus tutorials

For further assistance:

Library Home
Library Guides

How do I find articles?

Getting Started
Article Search Strategies
Finding an Article from a Citation
EBSCO Databases
ProQuest Databases
Find an Article Using a DOI or PMID

The following steps outline how you can do a cited reference search in Scopus :

1. Enter a few citation details into the main search page . The most efficient way to search is to enter the article title in the first box. In the next search box, enter the author's last name.

2. In the search results, the record for the proper citation will display how many times this article has been cited according to Scopus . This number can differ from Web of Science and Google Scholar .

3. Click on the Find It button to access the full-text. If the Library does not have access to the article, you can request the article through Interlibrary Loan .

For more information about cited reference searching and general tips on using Scopus , consult the interactive tutorials from Scopus .

Science librarians can help you identify and use scientific resources. Go to the Ask a Librarian page for assistance via email, chat, or phone.

Or, request a special training session on any topic for small groups or individuals.

<< Previous: ProQuest Databases
Next: Find an Article Using a DOI or PMID >>
Updated: Mar 26, 2024 12:13 PM
URL: https://guides.lib.uchicago.edu/articles
Report a problem
Login to LibApps

Open sourcetools

Research Guides

Mat136 - searching for articles.

Searching for Articles using Scopus and Web of Science
How to Read Academic Articles
Peer-Reviewed or Refereed Journals
Contact the Librarian - Consultations and Search Help

Introduction to Scopus and Web of Science

Scopus and Web of Science are the two largest interdisciplinary abstract and citation databases of peer-reviewed literature in the sciences. They both contain 10s of thousands of articles, book chapters, and conference proceedings.

Not everything contained in Scopus or Web of Science is full-text or comes from a scholarly publication. This guide will show you how to find full-text articles and how to identify the scholarly publications.

Scopus and Web of Science overlap a great deal in the publications they cover, but there are differences in their content. If you are not finding what you want in one of the databases, try your search with the other.

Scopus and Web of Science are very similar in the way they function and how they direct you in your search for articles. This guide will focus on searching for articles in Scopus, but the same method can be used when searching Web of Science.

Finding Scopus and Web of Science

To use Scopus and Web of Science, you have to go to the University of Toronto Library's website. You can access our webpage from www.library.utoronto.ca.

From the library page, go to Advanced Search and selected "Databases". Links to Scopus and Web of Science can be found at the bottom the "Popular Databases" page.

Start your Search

When you are starting your search, think of the terms you might use to locate articles of interest to you.

NOTE: The broader the search term, the more results you will get. For instance, in the example shown below, if only the search term "economics" was used, over 60,000 articles would have appeared on the "document results" list.

Making your search more specific brings up a more manageable set of search results. In this instance, using the search terms "economics" and "farming" directed Scopus to narrow down the search to articles dealing only with the economics of farming.

For the purposes of this assignment, it will serve you best to limit your search to the "Title, Abstract, Keyword" option. This will instruct Scopus to look for your search terms in the title of the article, in the abstract of the article, and the in keywords of the article. The abstract of the article is a short summary of what the article is about and the keywords are search terms connected to the article that are often supplied by the author.

Further Refining your Search

In this example, using the search terms "economics" and "farming" still resulted in almost 5,000 records. Scopus gives you options to further refine your search and narrow down the results. For your purposes, you can further refine your search to years the articles were published (you might just want search through the 5 most recent years); subject areas to further focus your search on your area of interest; and/or document type to limit your results to articles only.

After Identifying an Article of Interest

Neither Scopus nor Web of Science will allow you to search for differential equations or integrals within an article, so when you have identified an article of interest you will have to skim the text of the article to see if it includes the math you need for this assignment. You can only have access to the full-text of articles if you see the "full-text" button under the title of the article. If the article you are looking at does not contain differential equations or integrals, you can access articles similar to the one you have chosen by clicking on the title of the article or clicking on the "related documents" link.

References and Citations

When you click on the title of the article, you will be taken to a page that shows you the abstract and keywords of the article. This page also features links to the articles that the author used for her/his own research (references) and articles published more recently that have used the paper as a reference (cited by). If the article you have chosen does not have the necessary math within it, you might find what you are looking for by scanning the papers included in the references and cited by links.

Web of Science

Searching for articles in Web of Science is fundamentally the same as searching in Scopus. Like Scopus, Web of Science allows you to limit your search results, retrieve full-text articles, and have access to "references" and "cited by" links.

Note: There is difference in some of the terminology used by the two databases. In Web of Science, " Topic " will perform the same search that " Title/Abstract/Keywords " performs in Scopus.

<< Previous: Home
Next: How to Read Academic Articles >>
Last Updated: Mar 7, 2024 1:31 PM
URL: https://guides.library.utoronto.ca/mat136

University of Toronto Libraries 130 St. George St.,Toronto, ON, M5S 1A5 [email protected] 416-978-8450 Map About web accessibility . Tell us about a web accessibility problem . About online privacy and data collection .

Connect with us

more social media

Ask a Librarian

Citation Databases

Searching Scopus
Researcher Profiles
Researcher IDs
Searching Web of Science
Google Scholar
Research Impact and Metrics

Introduction to Scopus

Scopus is a powerful abstract and citation database owned by Elsevier and maintained since 2004. It has some powerful tools for researchers, students, and administrators to discover research, trends, and insights. It indexes over 2.4 billion citations, 94 million records, 29,000 titles, and 330,000 books. These titles are all searchable via the Scopus search and advanced search engines.

Scopus Uses for Researchers

Search for articles, conference proceedings, trade publications, and many other types of research output
Find author information, such as H-index, and lists of publications
Perform citation searches on known articles
Identify promising journals in which to publish
Match an organization with its research output
Locate potential collaborators or subject experts
Manage your impact with your ORCID ID
Set Citation Alerts

Metrics in Scopus

Scopus maintains a number of author level metrics which can give you insight into a particular author’s research presence.

You can see collaborations, citation count, document count, h-index, and their FWCI. Journal level metrics can be accessed via journal search, and metrics such as CiteScore, Scientific Journal Rankings (SJR), and Source Normalized Impact Per Paper (SNIP) will be displayed in the journal profile.

<< Previous: Home
Next: Searching Scopus >>
Last Edited: Apr 11, 2024 9:42 AM
URL: https://guides.lib.purdue.edu/citationdatabases

CSU Stanislaus
Research Guides

Scopus - Article, Citation, & Research Impact Database

Searching Scopus
Citation Tracing
Author Profiles
Metrics (Article, Author, Journal)
For Questions and Help

Library Liaison

Scopus Content and Overview

Scopus covers a very large but selective list of key academic journals from all disciplines.

26,000 leading academic journals
234,000 academic/edited books
Selective OpenAccess articles and journals

Scopus content / search functions include:

Article records / abstracts from leading academic journals (many covering 1970 - present)
Cited reference searching and citation tracing
Research impact and citation metrics for journals
Author Profiles (publication list, cited by, and metrics)
Institutional / university profiles, including publication and citation metrics

Scopus Key Features

Search features include:

Also includes a small collection of highly selected conference papers and book chapters
Authors: profiles of listed authors (publication, research metrics, and cited by links)
Sources: scholarly journal profiles and research impact metrics

Cited References:

Complete list of References for all items from covered source list
Complete "cited by" tracing and links in individual article and author records
For sources outside of the core journal literature, brief records (with links to citing publications) for all "References" listed under each core journal article
To search separately: choose "References" under the Documents search

Research metrics:

Article citation impact (FWCI)
Journal impact metrics (Cite Score, SJR, SNIP)
Author impact metrics (h-index)

Scopus Quick Links

Scopus Tutorials
Scopus Library Guide
Next: Searching Scopus >>
Last Updated: Feb 21, 2024 2:18 PM
URL: https://library.csustan.edu/scopusguide

University Library, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Scopus: Document Search

Getting Started

Document Search

Cited Reference Search & Analysis
Search Results
Personalization

Document Search is the default search page in Scopus. Select from a variety of search fields including article title, abstract, keyword, author name, publication date, and references. Scopus searches the bibliographic record, not the full-text of documents.

Watch our tutorial below for more information:

Author Search

Scopus allows users to search by name or ORCID to find the profile of a known author. Watch our tutorial below to learn how to conduct an author search:

Search Tips

Choose specific terms that are closely related to your research topic, including terms you might use when discussing your topic with a colleague such as jargon, synonyms, and abbreviations.
Scopus searches are not case sensitive.
AND limits search results, finding articles with both terms
OR broadens results, finding articles with either term
NOT eliminates terms from the results, finding articles with one term but not the other
Add an asterisk (*) to replace multiple characters in a word (eg. biol* returns biology, biologist)
Add a question mark (?) to replace a single character (eg. disrupt?rs for disrupters and disruptors)
PRE/# means "precedes by," meaning your first term must precede the second by # number of terms.
W# means "within," meaning your search terms must be within # number of terms of each other.
Use {brackets} to search for an exact phrase, and quotation marks to search for approximate phrases.
<< Previous: Searching in Scopus
Next: Cited Reference Search & Analysis >>
Last Updated: Mar 27, 2024 4:15 PM
URL: https://guides.library.illinois.edu/scopus

The top list of academic research databases

2. Web of Science

5. ieee xplore, 6. sciencedirect, 7. directory of open access journals (doaj), get the most out of your academic research database, frequently asked questions about academic research databases, related articles.

Whether you are writing a thesis , dissertation, or research paper it is a key task to survey prior literature and research findings. More likely than not, you will be looking for trusted resources, most likely peer-reviewed research articles.

Academic research databases make it easy to locate the literature you are looking for. We have compiled the top list of trusted academic resources to help you get started with your research:

Scopus is one of the two big commercial, bibliographic databases that cover scholarly literature from almost any discipline. Besides searching for research articles, Scopus also provides academic journal rankings, author profiles, and an h-index calculator .

Coverage: 90.6 million core records
References: N/A
Discipline: Multidisciplinary
Access options: Limited free preview, full access by institutional subscription only
Provider: Elsevier

Web of Science also known as Web of Knowledge is the second big bibliographic database. Usually, academic institutions provide either access to Web of Science or Scopus on their campus network for free.

Coverage: approx. 100 million items
References: 1.4 billion
Access options: institutional subscription only
Provider: Clarivate (formerly Thomson Reuters)

PubMed is the number one resource for anyone looking for literature in medicine or biological sciences. PubMed stores abstracts and bibliographic details of more than 30 million papers and provides full text links to the publisher sites or links to the free PDF on PubMed Central (PMC) .

Coverage: approx. 35 million items
Discipline: Medicine and Biological Sciences
Access options: free
Provider: NIH

For education sciences, ERIC is the number one destination. ERIC stands for Education Resources Information Center, and is a database that specifically hosts education-related literature.

Coverage: approx. 1.6 million items
Discipline: Education
Provider: U.S. Department of Education

Search interface of ERIC academic database

IEEE Xplore is the leading academic database in the field of engineering and computer science. It's not only journal articles, but also conference papers, standards and books that can be search for.

Coverage: approx. 6 million items
Discipline: Engineering
Provider: IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers)

ScienceDirect is the gateway to the millions of academic articles published by Elsevier, 1.4 million of which are open access. Journals and books can be searched via a single interface.

Coverage: approx. 19.5 million items

The DOAJ is an open-access academic database that can be accessed and searched for free.

Coverage: over 8 million records
Provider: DOAJ

JSTOR is another great resource to find research papers. Any article published before 1924 in the United States is available for free and JSTOR also offers scholarships for independent researchers.

Coverage: more than 12 million items
Provider: ITHAKA

Start using a reference manager like Paperpile to save, organize, and cite your references. Paperpile integrates with PubMed and many popular databases, so you can save references and PDFs directly to your library using the Paperpile buttons:

Scopus is one of the two big commercial, bibliographic databases that cover scholarly literature from almost any discipline. Beside searching for research articles, Scopus also provides academic journal rankings, author profiles, and an h-index calculator .

tree-logo-small-v2.png

Research trends reports
Tips & Tricks

Follow Scopus

Content (59)
Metrics (44)
Release (36)
Tips and Tricks (26)
SciVal (18)

OA Tagging chart.png

How will aligning the Scopus OA policy with Unpaywall affect existing documents?

This change will result in changes to roughly 2 million OA tags in Scopus. This represents roughly 8.4% of the 24 million+ OA items currently in Scopus. The change will result in documents shifting their classification status either from bronze to hybrid or gold, or from hybrid to gold. The change will not cause items to lose OA status, or for non-OA items to become OA. It also only affects the classification of a subset of OA items.

Where can I use the OA filters in Scopus?

If you are not familiar with using OA filters in Scopus, here are steps to apply OA filters in a basic search window.

When performing a Scopus search, search filters appear to the left of the screen. Click on the arrow icon to the right of Open Access to see a list OA classifications

Check off boxes next to the OA document classification(s) (All open access, Green, Gold, Bronze and Hybrid gold) you want to exclude from or include in your search. (Your selections will be highlighted in orange)

Click on the Exclude or Limit to buttons based on your search needs. The OA filter will be applied, and your selection will be graphically shown in the OA filter

How can I access OA documents?

Depending on the OA document type, Scopus will may provide links to access full article text. For example, with the example Gold OA document below users can:

Click on the View PDF article
Click on the arrow icon to the right of Full text options and choose from a list of available document sources

Is interdisciplinarity more likely to produce novel or disruptive research?

Published: 12 April 2024

Cite this article

Shiji Chen 1 , 4 ,
Yanan Guo 2 ,
Alvin Shijie Ding 3 &
Yanhui Song ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2456-222X 2

Although many studies suggest that interdisciplinary research fosters creativity and breakthroughs, there has been no quantitative study to confirm this belief. In recent years, several indicators have been developed to measure novelty or disruption in research. Compared with the citation impact, this type of indicator can more directly characterize research quality and contribution. Based on the F1000 Prime database and Scopus datasets accessed via ICSR Lab, F1000 novelty tags and two disruption indices (DI 1 and DI 5 ) were used in this study for the assessment of research quality and contribution, and it was explored whether interdisciplinarity is more likely to produce novel or disruptive research. Interestingly, DI 1 and DI 5 exhibit different relationships with F1000 novelty tags; the reason for this may be that DI 5 highlights disruptive research within a given discipline and amplifies the disruptive signal within that discipline. Furthermore, it is found that interdisciplinarity (RS and LCDiv) is positively associated with F1000 novelty tags and the disruption indices (DI 1 and DI 5 ). As a result, it is demonstrated that interdisciplinarity helps to produce novel or disruptive research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Adams, J., Jackson, L., & Marshall, S. (2007). Bibliometric analysis of interdisciplinary research. Report to the Higher Education Funding Council for England.

Ahlgren, P., Jarneving, B., & Rousseau, R. (2003). Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54 (6), 550–560.

Article Google Scholar

Archambault, É., Beauchesne O. H., & J. Caruso, J. (2011). Towards a Multilingual, Comprehensive and Open Scientific Journal Ontology. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics Durban, South Africa.

Arthur, W. B. (2009). The Nature of Technology: What it Is and How it Evolves. New York, Free Press.

Bordons, M., Morillo, F., & Gómez, I. (2005). Analysis of cross-disciplinary research through bibliometric tools. In M. Bordons, F. Morillo, & I. Gómez (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 437–456). Springer.

Chapter Google Scholar

Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2009). Reviewer and editor biases in journal peer review: an investigation of manuscript refereeing at Angewandte Chemie International Edition. Research Evaluation, 18 (4), 262–272.

Bornmann, L., Devarakonda, S., Tekles, A., & Chacko, G. (2020). Are disruption index indicators convergently valid? The comparison of several indicator variants with assessments by peers. Quantitative Science Studies, 1 (3), 1242–1259.

Bornmann, L., & Tekles, A. (2021). Convergent validity of several indicators measuring disruptiveness with milestone assignments to physics papers by experts. Journal of Informetrics, 15 (3), 101159.

Bornmann, L., Tekles, A., Zhang, H. H., & Ye, F. Y. (2019). Do we measure novelty when we analyze unusual combinations of cited references? A validation study of bibliometric novelty indicators based on F1000Prime data. Journal of Informetrics, 13 (4), 15.

Boyack, K. & R. Klavans (2014). Atypical combinations are confounded by disciplinary effects. 19th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, Leiden, The Netherlands

Bu, Y., Waltman, L., & Huang, Y. (2021). A multi-dimensional framework for characterizing the citation impact of scientific publications. Quantitative Science Studies, 2 (1), 155–183.

Carayol, N., Llopis, O., & Lahatte, A. (2016). Capturing scientific novelty through paper keyword combinations. Proceedings of the 21 ST International Conference on science and technology indicator . València, Spain

Cassi, L., Champeimont, R., Mescheba, W., & de Turckheim, E. (2017). Analysing institutions interdisciplinarity by extensive use of rao-stirling diversity index. PLoS ONE . https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0170296

Chen, S., Arsenault, C., & Larivière, V. (2015). Are top-cited papers more interdisciplinary? Journal of Informetrics, 9 (4), 1034–1046.

Fontana, M., Iori, M., Montobbio, F., & Sinatra, R. (2020). New and atypical combinations: An assessment of novelty and interdisciplinarity. Research Policy, 49 (7), 28.

Funk, R. J., & Owen-Smith, J. (2017). A dynamic network measure of technological change. Management Science, 63 (3), 791–817.

Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies . SAGE Publications.

Google Scholar

Gooch, D., Vasalou, A., & Benton, L. (2017). Impact in interdisciplinary and cross-sector research: Opportunities and challenges. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68 (2), 378–391.

Ho, Y. S., & Hartley, J. (2017). Sleeping beauties in psychology. Scientometrics, 110 (1), 301–305.

Hollingsworth, J. R. (2009). A path-dependent perspective on institutional and organizational factors shaping major scientific discoveries. In J. Hage & M. Meeus (Eds.), Innovation, science, and institutional change (pp. 423–442). Oxford University Press.

Hu, D., She, M. Y., Ye, L. F., & Wang, Z. W. (2021). The more the merrier? Inventor team size, diversity, and innovation quality. Science and Public Policy, 48 (4), 508–520.

Ke, Q., Ferrara, E., Radicchi, F., & Flammini, A. (2015). Defining and identifying Sleeping Beauties in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112 (24), 7426.

Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions . University of Chicago Press.

Lachance, C., & Lariviere, V. (2014). On the citation lifecycle of papers with delayed recognition. Journal of Informetrics, 8 (4), 863–872.

Lariviere, V., & Gingras, Y. (2010). On the relationship between interdisciplinarity and scientific impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61 (1), 126–131.

Larivière, V., & Gingras, Y. (2014). Measuring interdisciplinarity. In V. Larivière & Y. Gingras (Eds.), Beyond bibliometrics: Harnessing multidimensional indicators of scholarly impact (pp. 187–200). MIT Press.

Lariviere, V., Gingras, Y., Sugimoto, C. R., & Tsou, A. (2015). Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66 (7), 1323–1332.

Larivière, V., Haustein, S., & Börner, K. (2015). Long-distance interdisciplinarity leads to higher scientific impact. PLoS ONE, 10 (3), e0122565.

Leahey, E., Lee, J., & Funk, R. J. (2023). What types of novelty are most disruptive? American Sociological Review, 88 (3), 562–597.

Lee, Y.-N., Walsh, J. P., & Wang, J. (2015). Creativity in scientific teams: Unpacking novelty and impact. Research Policy, 44 (3), 684–697.

Leinster, T., & Cobbold, C. A. (2012). Measuring diversity: The importance of species similarity. Ecology, 93 (3), 477–489.

Levitt, J. M., & Thelwall, M. (2008). Is multidisciplinary research more highly cited? A macrolevel study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59 (12), 1973–1984.

Levitt, J. M., & Thelwall, M. (2009). The most highly cited Library and Information Science articles: Interdisciplinarity, first authors and citation patterns. Scientometrics, 78 (1), 45–67.

Leydesdorff, L. (2018). Diversity and interdisciplinarity: How can one distinguish and recombine disparity, variety, and balance? Scientometrics, 116 (3), 2113–2121.

Leydesdorff, L., Alkemade, F., Heimeriks, G., & Hoekstra, R. (2015). Patents as instruments for exploring innovation dynamics: Geographic and technological perspectives on “photovoltaic cells.” Scientometrics, 102 (1), 629–651.

Leydesdorff, L., & Bornmann, L. (2021). Disruption indices and their calculation using web-of-science data: Indicators of historical developments or evolutionary dynamics? Journal of Informetrics . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2021.101219

Leydesdorff, L., Rafols, I., & Chen, C. (2013). Interactive overlays of journals and the measurement of interdisciplinarity on the basis of aggregated journal-journal citations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64 (12), 2573–2586.

Leydesdorff, L., Wagner, C. S., & Bornmann, L. (2019a). Diversity measurement: Steps towards the measurement of interdisciplinarity? Journal of Informetrics, 13 (3), 904–905.

Leydesdorff, L., Wagner, C. S., & Bornmann, L. (2019b). Interdisciplinarity as diversity in citation patterns among journals: Rao-Stirling diversity, relative variety, and the Gini coefficient. Journal of Informetrics, 13 (1), 255–269.

Lyu, D. Q., Gong, K. L., Ruan, X. M., Cheng, Y., & Li, J. (2021). Does research collaboration influence the “disruption” of articles? Evidence from neurosciences. Scientometrics . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03757-2

Min, C., Sun, J. J., Pei, L., & Ding, Y. (2016). Measuring delayed recognition for papers: Uneven weighted summation and total citations. Journal of Informetrics, 10 (4), 1153–1165.

Moreno, Md. C. C., & Danowitz, M. A. (2016). Becoming an interdisciplinary scientist: an analysis of students’ experiences in three computer science doctoral programmes. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 38 (4), 448–464.

Mugabushaka, A.-M., Kyriakou, A., & Papazoglou, T. (2016). Bibliometric indicators of interdisciplinarity: The potential of the Leinster-Cobbold diversity indices to study disciplinary diversity. Scientometrics, 107 (2), 593–607.

Mutz, R. (2022). Diversity and interdisciplinarity: Should variety, balance and disparity be combined as a product or better as a sum? An information-theoretical and statistical estimation approach. Scientometrics . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04336-3

National Academy of Sciences. (2005). Facilitating interdisciplinary research . National Academies Press.

Ponomarev, I. V., Lawton, B. K., Williams, D. E., & Schnell, J. D. (2014a). Breakthrough paper indicator 2.0: Can geographical diversity and interdisciplinarity improve the accuracy of outstanding papers prediction? Scientometrics, 100 (3), 755–765.

Ponomarev, I. V., Williams, D. E., Hackett, C. J., Schnell, J. D., & Haak, L. L. (2014b). Predicting highly cited papers: A method for early detection of candidate breakthroughs. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 81 , 49–55.

Porter, A. L., & Chubin, D. E. (1985). An indicator of cross-disciplinary research. Scientometrics, 8 (3–4), 161–176.

Porter, A., & Rafols, I. (2009). Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time. Scientometrics, 81 (3), 719–745.

Rafols, I., Leydesdorff, L., O’Hare, A., Nightingale, P., & Stirling, A. (2012). How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management. Research Policy, 41 (7), 1262–1282.

Rafols, I., & Meyer, M. (2010). Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: Case studies in bionanoscience. Scientometrics, 82 (2), 263–287.

Rinia, E. J., Leeuwen, T. N. V., Bruins, E. E. W., Vuren, H. G. V., & Raan, A. F. J. V. (2001). Citation delay in interdisciplinary knowledge exchange. Scientometrics, 51 , 293–309.

Rinia, E. J. (2007). Measurement and evaluation of interdisciplinary research and knowledge transfer. PhD, Leiden University.

Schumpeter, J. A. (1939). Business cycles: A theoretical, historical, and statistical analysis of the capitalist process . McGraw-Hill.

Shibayama, S., & Wang, J. (2020). Measuring originality in science. Scientometrics, 122 (1), 409–427.

Stirling, A. (2007). A general framework for analysing diversity in science, technology and society. Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 4 (15), 707–719.

Tahamtan, I., & Bornmann, L. (2018). Creativity in science and the link to cited references: Is the creative potential of papers reflected in their cited references? Journal of Informetrics, 12 (3), 906–930.

Uddin, S., & Khan, A. (2016). The impact of author-selected keywords on citation counts. Journal of Informetrics, 10 (4), 1166–1177.

Uzzi, B., Mukherjee, S., Stringer, M., & Jones, B. (2013). Atypical combinations and scientific impact. Science, 342 (6157), 468–472.

Van Noorden, R. (2015). Interdisciplinary research by the numbers. Nature, 525 (7569), 306–307.

Wagner, C. S., Roessner, J. D., Bobb, K., Klein, J. T., Boyack, K. W., Keyton, J., Rafols, I., & Borner, K. (2011). Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature. Journal of Informetrics, 5 (1), 14–26.

Wang, J. (2016). Knowledge creation in collaboration networks: Effects of tie configuration. Research Policy, 45 (1), 68–80.

Wang, J., Thijs, B., & Glänzel, W. (2015). Interdisciplinarity and impact: Distinct effects of variety, balance, and disparity. PLoS ONE, 10 (5), e0127298.

Wang, J., Veugelers, R., & Stephan, P. (2017). Bias against novelty in science: A cautionary tale for users of bibliometric indicators. Research Policy, 46 (8), 1416–1436.

Wang, Q., & Schneider, J. W. (2020). Consistency and validity of interdisciplinarity measures. Quantitative Science Studies, 1 (1), 239–263.

Warman, L., Bradford, M. G., & Moles, A. T. (2013). A broad approach to abrupt boundaries: looking beyond the boundary at soil attributes within and across tropical vegetation types. PLoS ONE . https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060789

Weiss, M., & Hoegl, M. (2016). Effects of relative team size on teams with innovative tasks: An understaffing theory perspective. Organizational Psychology Review, 6 (4), 324–351.

Winnink, J. J., & Tijssen, R. J. W. (2015). Early stage identification of breakthroughs at the interface of science and technology: Lessons drawn from a landmark publication. Scientometrics, 102 (1), 113–134.

Wu, L., Wang, D., & Evans, J. A. (2019). Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology. Nature, 566 (7744), 378–382.

Yan, Y., Tian, S. W., & Zhang, J. J. (2020). The impact of a paper’s new combinations and new components on its citation. Scientometrics, 122 (2), 895–913.

Yegros-Yegros, A., Rafols, I., & D’Este, P. (2015). Does interdisciplinary research lead to higher citation impact? The different effect of proximal and distal interdisciplinarity. PLoS ONE, 10 (8), e0135095.

Yong, K., Sauer, S. J., & Mannix, E. A. (2014). Conflict and creativity in interdisciplinary teams. Small Group Research, 45 (3), 266–289.

Zhang, L., Rousseau, R., & Glänzel, W. (2016). Diversity of references as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of journals: Taking similarity between subject fields into account. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67 (5), 1257–1265.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The first author acknowledges support from the National Social Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 20BTQ083) and the National Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 72174016)

This work was funded by National Social Science Fund of China (Grant No. 20BTQ083).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Chinese Academy of Science and Education Evaluation (CASEE), Hangzhou Dianzi University, Xiasha, Hangzhou, 310018, Zhejiang, China

School of Management, Hangzhou Dianzi University, Xiasha, Hangzhou, 310018, Zhejiang, China

Yanan Guo & Yanhui Song

International Center for the Study of Research, Elsevier, No.1 East Chang An Avenue, Beijing, 100738, China

Alvin Shijie Ding

École de Bibliothéconomie et Des Sciences de L’information, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Canada, H3C 3J7

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yanhui Song .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Chen, S., Guo, Y., Ding, A.S. et al. Is interdisciplinarity more likely to produce novel or disruptive research?. Scientometrics (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-04981-w

Download citation

Received : 17 March 2023

Accepted : 26 February 2024

Published : 12 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-04981-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Interdisciplinarity
Disruption index
Interdisciplinarity indicators
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

Open access
Published: 11 April 2024

The role of champions in the implementation of technology in healthcare services: a systematic mixed studies review

Sissel Pettersen 1 ,
Hilde Eide 2 &
Anita Berg 1

BMC Health Services Research volume 24 , Article number: 456 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

Champions play a critical role in implementing technology within healthcare services. While prior studies have explored the presence and characteristics of champions, this review delves into the experiences of healthcare personnel holding champion roles, as well as the experiences of healthcare personnel interacting with them. By synthesizing existing knowledge, this review aims to inform decisions regarding the inclusion of champions as a strategy in technology implementation and guide healthcare personnel in these roles.

A systematic mixed studies review, covering qualitative, quantitative, or mixed designs, was conducted from September 2022 to March 2023. The search spanned Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Scopus, focusing on studies published from 2012 onwards. The review centered on health personnel serving as champions in technology implementation within healthcare services. Quality assessments utilized the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).

From 1629 screened studies, 23 were included. The champion role was often examined within the broader context of technology implementation. Limited studies explicitly explored experiences related to the champion role from both champions’ and health personnel’s perspectives. Champions emerged as promoters of technology, supporting its adoption. Success factors included anchoring and selection processes, champions’ expertise, and effective role performance.

The specific tasks and responsibilities assigned to champions differed across reviewed studies, highlighting that the role of champion is a broad one, dependent on the technology being implemented and the site implementing it. Findings indicated a correlation between champion experiences and organizational characteristics. The role’s firm anchoring within the organization is crucial. Limited evidence suggests that volunteering, hiring newly graduated health personnel, and having multiple champions can facilitate technology implementation. Existing studies predominantly focused on client health records and hospitals, emphasizing the need for broader research across healthcare services.

Conclusions

With a clear mandate, dedicated time, and proper training, health personnel in champion roles can significantly contribute professional, technological, and personal competencies to facilitate technology adoption within healthcare services. The review finds that the concept of champions is a broad one and finds varied definitions of the champion role concept. This underscores the importance of describing organizational characteristics, and highlights areas for future research to enhance technology implementation strategies in different healthcare settings with support of a champion.

Peer Review reports

Digital health technologies play a transformative role in healthcare service systems [ 1 , 2 ]. The utilization of technology and digitalization is essential for ensuring patient safety, delivering high quality, cost-effective, and sustainable healthcare services [ 3 , 4 ]. The implementation of technology in healthcare services is a complex process that demands systematic changes in roles, workflows, and service provision [ 5 , 6 ].

The successful implementation of new technologies in healthcare services relies on the adaptability of health professionals [ 7 , 8 , 9 ]. Champions have been identified as a key factor in the successful implementation of technology among health personnel [ 10 , 11 , 12 ]. However, they have rarely been studied as an independent strategy; instead, they are often part of a broader array of strategies in implementation studies (e.g., Hudson [ 13 ], Gullslett and Bergmo [ 14 ]). Prior research has frequently focused on determining the presence or absence of champions [ 10 , 12 , 15 ], as well as investigating the characteristics of individuals assuming the champion role (e.g., George et al. [ 16 ], Shea and Belden [ 17 ]).

Recent reviews on champions [ 18 , 19 , 20 ] have studied their effects on adherence to guidelines, implementation of innovations and facilitation of evidence-based practice. While these reviews suggest that having champions yields positive effects, they underscore the importance for studies that offer detailed insights into the champion’s role concerning specific types of interventions.

There is limited understanding of the practical role requirements and the actual experiences of health personnel in performing the champion role in the context of technology implementation within healthcare services. Further, this knowledge is needed to guide future research on the practical, professional, and relational prerequisites for health personnel in this role and for organizations to successfully employ champions as a strategy in technology implementation processes.

This review seeks to synthesize the existing empirical knowledge concerning the experiences of those in the champion role and the perspectives of health personnel involved in technology implementation processes. The aim is to contribute valuable insights that enhance our understanding of practical role requirements, the execution of the champion role, and best practices in this domain.

The term of champions varies [ 10 , 19 ] and there is a lack of explicit conceptualization of the term ‘champion’ in the implementation literature [ 12 , 18 ]. Various terms for individuals with similar roles also exist in the literature, such as implementation leader, opinion leader, facilitator, change agent, superuser and facilitator. For the purpose of this study, we have adopted the terminology utilized in the recent review by Rigby, Redley and Hutchinson [ 21 ] collectively referring to these roles as ‘champions’. This review aims to explore the experiences of health personnel in their role as champions and the experiences of health personnel interacting with them in the implementation of technology in the healthcare services.

Prior review studies on champions in healthcare services have employed various designs [ 10 , 18 , 19 , 20 ]. In this review, we utilized a comprehensive mixed studies search to identify relevant empirical studies [ 22 ]. The search was conducted utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, ensuring a transparent and comprehensive overview that can be replicated or updated by others [ 23 ]. The study protocol is registered in PROSPERO (ID CRD42022335750), providing a more comprehensive description of the methods [ 24 ]. A systematic mixed studies review, examining research using diverse study designs, is well-suited for synthesizing existing knowledge and identifying gaps by harnessing the strengths of both qualitative and quantitative methods [ 22 ]. Our search encompassed qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods design to capture experiences with the role of champions in technology implementation.

Search strategy and study selection

Search strategy.

The first author, in collaboration with a librarian, developed the search strategy based on initial searches to identify appropriate terms and truncations that align with the eligibility criteria. The search was constructed utilizing a combination of MeSH terms and keywords related to technology, implementation, champion, and attitudes/experiences. Conducted in August/September 2022, the search encompassed four databases: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Scopus, with an updated search conducted in March 2023. The full search strategy for Medline is provided in Appendix 1 . The searches in Embase, CINAHL and Scopus employed the same strategy, with adopted terms and phrases to meet the requirements of each respective database.

Eligibility criteria

We included all empirical studies employing qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods designs that detailed the experiences and/or attitudes of health personnel regarding the champions role in the implementation of technology in healthcare services. Articles in the English language published between 2012 and 2023 were considered. The selected studies involved technology implemented or adapted within healthcare services.

Conference abstract and review articles were excluded from consideration. Articles published prior 2012 were excluded as a result of the rapid development of technology, which could impact the experiences reported. Furthermore, articles involving surgical technology and pre-implementation studies were also excluded, as the focus was on capturing experiences and attitudes from the adoption and daily use of technology. The study also excluded articles that involved champions without clinical health care positions.

Study selection

A total of 1629 studies were identified and downloaded from the selected databases, with Covidence [ 25 ] utilized as a software platform for screening. After removing 624 duplicate records, all team members collaborated to calibrate the screening process utilizing the eligibility criteria on the initial 50 studies. Subsequently, the remaining abstracts were independently screened by two researchers, blinded to each other, to ensure adherence to the eligibility criteria. Studies were included if the title and abstract included the term champion or its synonyms, along with technology in healthcare services, implementation, and health personnel’s experiences or attitudes. Any discrepancies were resolved through consensus among all team members. A total of 949 abstracts were excluded for not meeting this inclusion condition. During the initial search, 56 remaining studies underwent full-text screening, resulting in identification of 22 studies qualified for review.

In the updated search covering the period September 2022 to March 2023, 64 new studies were identified. Of these, 18 studies underwent full-text screening, and one study was included in our review. The total number of included studies is 23. The PRISMA flowchart (Fig. 1 ) illustrates the process.

Flow Chart illustrating the study selection and screening process

Data extraction

The research team developed an extraction form for the included studies utilizing an Excel spreadsheet. Following data extraction, the information included the Name of Author(s) Year of publication, Country/countries, Title of the article, Setting, Aim, Design, Participants, and Sample size of the studies, Technology utilized in healthcare services, name/title utilized to describe the Champion Role, how the studies were analyzed and details of Attitude/Experience with the role of champion. Data extraction was conducted by SP, and the results were deliberated in a workshop with the other researchers AB, and HE until a consensus was reached. Any discrepancies were resolved through discussions. The data extraction was categorized into three categories: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods, in preparation for quality appraisal.

Quality appraisal

The MMAT [ 26 ] was employed to assess the quality of the 23 included studies. Specifically designed for mixed studies reviews, the MMAT allows for the appraisal of the methodological quality of studies falling into five categories. The studies in our review encompassed qualitative, quantitative descriptive, and mixed methods studies. The MMAT begins with two screening questions to confirm the empirical nature of this study. Subsequently, all studies were categorized by type and evaluated utilizing specific criteria based on their research methods, with ratings of ‘Yes,’ ‘No’ or ‘Can’t tell.’ The MMAT discourages overall scores in favor of providing a detailed explanation for each criterion. Consequently, we did not rely on the MMAT’s overall methodical quality scores and continued to include all 23 studies for our review. Two researchers independently scored the studies, and any discrepancies were discussed among all team members until a consensus was reached. The results of the MMAT assessments are provided in Appendix 2 .

Data synthesis

Based on discussions of this material, additional tables were formulated to present a comprehensive overview of the study characteristics categorized by study design, study settings, technology included, and descriptions/characteristics of the champion role. To capture attitudes and experiences associated with the champion role, the findings from the included studies were translated into narrative texts [ 22 ]. Subsequently, the reviewers worked collaboratively to conduct a thematic analysis, drawing inspiration from Braun and Clarke [ 27 ]. Throughout the synthesis process, multiple meetings were conducted to discern and define the emerging themes and subthemes.

The adopting of new technology in healthcare services can be perceived as both an event and a process. According to Iqbal [ 28 ], experience is defined as the knowledge and understanding gained after an event or the process of living through or undergoing an event. This review synthesizes existing empirical knowledge regarding the experiences of occupying the champion role, and the perspectives of health personnel interacting with champions in technology implementation processes.

Study characteristics

The review encompassed a total of 23 studies, and an overview of these studies is presented in Table 1 . Of these, fourteen studies employed a qualitative design, four had quantitative design, and five utilized a mixed method design. The geographical distribution revealed that the majority of studies were conducted in the USA (8), followed by Australia (5), England (4), Canada (2), Norway (2), Ireland (1), and Malaysia (1). In terms of settings, 11 studies were conducted in hospitals, five in primary health care, three in home-based care settings, and four in a mixed settings where two or more settings collaborated. Various technologies were employed across these studies, with client health records (7) and telemedicine (5) being the most frequently utilized. All studies included experiences from champions or health personnel collaborating with champions in their respective healthcare services. Only three studies had the champion role as a main objective [ 29 , 30 , 31 ]. The remaining studies described champions as one of the strategies in technology implementation processes, including 10 evaluation studies (including feasibility studies [ 32 , 33 , 34 ] and one cost-benefit study [ 30 ]).

Several studies underscored the importance of champions for successful implementation [ 29 , 30 , 31 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 49 ]. Four studies specifically highlighted champions as a key factor for success [ 34 , 36 , 37 , 43 ], and one study went further to describe champions as the most important factor for successful implementation [ 39 ]. Additionally, one study associated champions with reduced labor cost [ 30 ].

Thin descriptions, yet clear expectations for technology champions’ role and -attributes

The analyses revealed that the concept of champions in studies pertaining to technology implementation in healthcare services varies, primarily as a result of the diversity of terms utilized to describe the role combined with short role descriptions. Nevertheless, the studies indicated clear expectations for the champion’s role and associated attributes.

The term champion

The term champion was expressed in 20 different forms across the 23 studies included in our review. Three studies utilized multiple terms within the same study [ 32 , 47 , 48 ] and 15 different authors [ 29 , 32 , 33 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 46 , 47 , 50 ] employed the term with different compositions (Table 1 ). Furthermore, four authors utilized the term Super user [ 30 , 31 , 49 , 51 ], while four authors employed the terms Facilitator [ 38 ], IT clinician [ 48 ], Leader [ 45 ], and Manager [ 34 ], each in combination with more specific terms (such as local opinion leaders, IT nurse, or practice manager).

Most studies associated champion roles with specific professions. In seven studies, the professional title was explicitly linked to the concept of champions, such as physician champions or clinical nurse champions, or through the strategic selection of specific professions [ 29 , 33 , 36 , 40 , 43 , 47 , 50 ]. Additionally, some studies did not specify professions, but utilized terms like clinicians [ 45 ] or health professionals [ 41 ].

All included articles portray the champion’s role as facilitating implementation and daily use of technology among staff. In four studies, the champion’s role was not elaborated beyond indicating that the individual holding the role is confident with an interest in technology [ 35 , 41 , 42 , 44 ]. The champion’s role was explicitly examined in six studies [ 29 , 30 , 31 , 33 , 46 , 50 ]. Furthermore, seven studies described the champion in both the methods and results [ 32 , 36 , 38 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 51 ]. In ten of the studies, champions were solely mentioned in the results [ 34 , 35 , 37 , 39 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 ].

Eight studies provided a specific description or definition of the champion [ 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 38 , 48 , 49 , 50 ]. The champion’s role was described as involving training in the specific technology, being an expert on the technology, providing support and assisting peers when needed. In some instance, the champion had a role in leading the implementation [ 50 ], while in other situations, the champion operated as a mediator [ 48 ].

The champions tasks

In the included studies, the champion role encompassed two interrelated facilitators tasks: promoting the technology and supporting others in adopting the technology in their daily practice. Promoting the technology involved encouraging staff adaptation [ 32 , 34 , 35 , 37 , 40 , 41 , 49 ], generally described as being enthusiastic about the technology [ 32 , 35 , 37 , 41 , 48 ], influencing the attitudes and beliefs of colleagues [ 42 , 45 ] and legitimizing the introduction of the technology [ 42 , 46 , 48 ]. Supporting others in technology adaption involved training and teaching [ 31 , 35 , 38 , 40 , 51 ], as well as providing technical support [ 30 , 31 , 39 , 43 , 49 ] and social support [ 49 ]. Only four studies reported that the champions received their own training to enable them able to support their colleagues [ 30 , 31 , 39 , 48 ]. Furthermore, eight studies [ 32 , 34 , 38 , 40 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 ], specified that the champion role included leadership and management responsibilities, mentioning tasks such as planning, organizing, coordinating, and mediating technology adaption without providing further details.

Desirable champion attributes

To effectively fulfill their role, champions should ideally possess clinical expertise and experience [ 29 , 35 , 38 , 40 , 48 ], stay professionally updated [ 37 , 48 ], and possess knowledge of the organization and workflows [ 29 , 34 , 46 ]. They should have the ability to understand and communicate effectively with healthcare personnel [ 31 , 32 , 46 , 49 ] and be proficient in IT language [ 51 ]. Moreover, champions should demonstrate a general technological interest and competence, and competence, along with specific knowledge of the technology to be implemented [ 32 , 37 , 49 ]. It is also emphasized that they should command formal and/or informal respect and authority in the organization [ 36 , 45 ], be accessible to others [ 39 , 43 ], possess leadership qualities [ 34 , 37 , 38 , 46 ], and understand and balance the needs of stakeholders [ 43 ]. Lastly, the champions should be enthusiastic promoters of the technology, engaging and supporting others [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 37 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 43 , 49 ], while also effectively coping with cultural resistance to change [ 31 , 46 ].

Anchoring and recruiting for the champion role

The champions were organized differently within services, holding various positions in the organizations, and being recruited for the role in different ways.

Anchoring the champion role

The champion’s role is primarily anchored at two levels: the management level and/or the clinical level, with two studies having champions at both levels [ 34 , 49 ]. Those working with the management actively participated in the planning of the technology implementation [ 29 , 36 , 40 , 41 , 45 ]. Serving as advisors to management, they leveraged their clinical knowledge to guide the implementation in alignment with the necessities and possibilities of daily work routines in the clinics. Champions in this capacity experienced having a clear formal position that enabled them to fulfil their role effectively [ 29 , 40 ]. Moreover, these champions served as bridge builders between the management and department levels [ 36 , 45 ], ensuring the necessary flow of information in both directions.

Champions anchored at the clinic level played a pivotal role in the practical implementation and facilitation of the daily use of technology [ 31 , 33 , 35 , 37 , 38 , 43 , 48 , 51 ]. Additionally, these champions actively participated in meetings with senior management to discuss the technology and its implementation in the clinic. This position conferred potential influence over health personnel [ 33 , 35 ]. Champions at the clinic level facilitated collaboration between employees, management, and suppliers [ 48 ]. Fontaine et al. [ 36 ] identified respected champions at the clinical level, possessing authority and formal support from all leadership levels, as the most important factor for success.

Only one study reported that the champions received additional compensation for their role [ 36 ], while another study mentioned champions having dedicated time to fulfil their role [ 46 ]. The remaining studies did not provide this information.

Recruiting for the role as champion

Several studies have reported different experiences regarding the management’s selection of champions. A study highlighted the distinctions between a volunteered role and an appointed champion’s role [ 31 ]. Some studies underscored that appointed champions were chosen based on technological expertise and skills [ 41 , 48 , 51 ]. Moreover, the selection criteria included champions’ interest in the specific technology [ 42 ] or experiential skills [ 40 ]. The remaining studies did not provide this information.

While the champion role was most frequently held by health personnel with clinical experience, one study deviated by hiring 150 newly qualified nurses as champions [ 30 ] for a large-scale implementation of an Electronic Health Record (EHR). Opting for clinical novices assisted in reducing implementation costs, as it avoided disrupting daily tasks and interfering with daily operations. According to Bullard [ 30 ], these super-user nurses became highly sought after post-implementation as a result of their technological confidence and competence.

Reported experiences of champions and health personnel

Drawing from the experiences of both champions and health personnel, it is essential for a champion to possess a combination of general knowledge and specific champion characteristics. Furthermore, champions are required to collaborate with individuals both within and outside the organization. The subsequent paragraphs delineate these experiences, categorizing them into four subsets: champions’ contextual knowledge and expertise, preferred performance of the champion role, recognizing that a champion alone is insufficient, and distinguishing between reactive and proactive champions.

Champions’ contextual knowledge and know-how

Health personnel with experience interacting with champions emphasized that a champion must be familiar with the department and its daily work routines [ 35 , 40 ]. Knowledge of the department’s daily routines made it easier for champions to facilitate the adaptation of technology. However, there was a divergence of opinions on whether champions were required to possess extensive clinical experience to fulfil their role. In most studies, having an experienced and competent clinician as a champion instilled a sense of confidence among health personnel. Conversely, Bullard’s study [ 30 ] exhibited that health personnel were satisfied with newly qualified nurses in the role of champion, despite their initial skepticism.

It is a generally expected that champions should possess technological knowledge beyond that of other health professionals [ 37 , 41 ]. Some health personnel perceived the champions as uncritical promoters of technology, with the impression that health personnel were being compelled to utilize technology [ 46 ]. Champions could also overestimate the readiness of health personnel to implement a technology, especially during the early phases of the implementation process [ 32 ]. Regardless of whether the champion is at the management level or the clinic level, champions themselves have acknowledged the importance of providing time and space for innovation. Moreover, the recruitment of champions should span all levels of the organization [ 34 , 46 ]. Furthermore, champions must be familiar with daily work routines, work tools, and work surfaces [ 38 , 40 , 43 ].

Preferable performance of the champion role

The studies identified several preferable characteristics of successful champions. Health personnel favored champions utilizing positive words when discussing technology and exhibiting positive attitudes while facilitating and adapting it [ 33 , 34 , 37 , 38 , 41 , 46 ]. Additionally, champions who were enthusiastic and engaging were considered good role models for the adoption of technology. Successful champions were perceived as knowledgeable and adept problem solvers who motivated and supported health personnel [ 41 , 43 , 44 , 48 ]. They were also valued for being available and responding promptly when contacted [ 42 ]. Health professionals noted that champions perceived as competent garnered respect in the organization [ 40 ]. Moreover, some health personnel felt that some certain champions wielded a greater influence based on how they encouraged the use of the system [ 48 ]. It was also emphasized that health personnel needed to feel it was safe to provide feedback to champions, especially when encountering difficulties or uncertainties [ 49 ].

A champion is not enough

The role of champions proved to be more demanding than expected [ 29 , 31 , 38 ], involving tasks such as handling an overwhelming number of questions or actively participating in the installation process to ensure the technology functions effectively in the department [ 29 ]. Regardless of the organizational characteristics or the champion’s profile, appointing the champion as a “solo implementation agent” is deemed unsuitable. If the organization begins with one champion, it is recommended that this individual promptly recruits others into the role [ 42 ].

Health personnel, reliant on champions’ expertise, found it beneficial to have champions in all departments, and these champions had to be actively engaged in day-to-day operations [ 31 , 33 , 34 , 37 ]. Champions themselves also noted that health personnel increased their technological expertise through their role as champions in the department [ 39 ].

Furthermore, the successful implementation of technology requires the collaboration of various professions and support functions, a task that cannot be solely addressed by a champion [ 29 , 43 , 48 ]. In Orchard et. al.‘s study [ 34 ], champions explicitly emphasized the necessity of support from other personnel in the organization, such as those responsible for the technical aspects and archiving routines, to provide essential assistance.

According to health personnel, the role of champions is vulnerable in case they become sick or leave their position [ 42 , 51 ]. In some of the included studies, only one or a few hold the position of champion [ 37 , 38 , 42 , 48 ]. Two studies observed that their implementations were not completed because champions left or reassigned for various reasons [ 32 , 51 ]. The health professionals in the study by Owens and Charles [ 32 ] expressed that champions must be replaced in such cases. Further, the study of Olsen et al., 2021 [ 42 ] highlights the need for quicky building a champion network within the organization.

Reactive and proactive champions

Health personnel and champions alike noted that champions played both a reactive and proactive role. The proactive role entailed facilitating measures such as training and coordination [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 37 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 43 , 48 , 49 ] as initiatives to generate enthusiasm for the technology [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 37 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 43 , 49 ]. On the other hand, the reactive role entailed hands-on support and troubleshooting [ 30 , 31 , 39 , 43 , 49 ].

In a study presenting experiences from both health personnel and champions, Yuan et al. [ 31 ] found that personnel observed differences in the assistance provided by appointed and self-chosen champions. Appointed champions demonstrated the technology, answered questions from health personnel, but quickly lost patience and track of employees who had received training [ 31 ]. Health personnel perceived that self-chosen champions were proactive and well-prepared to facilitate the utilization of technology, communicating with the staff as a group and being more competent in utilizing the technology in daily practice [ 31 ]. Health personnel also noted that volunteer champions were supportive, positive, and proactive in promoting the technology, whereas appointed champions acted on request and had a more reactive approach [ 31 ].

This review underscores the breadth of the concept of champion and the significant variation in the champion’s role in implementation of technology in healthcare services. This finding supports the results from previous reviews [ 10 , 18 , 19 , 20 ]. The majority of studies meeting our inclusion criteria did not specifically focus on the experiences of champions and health personnel regarding the champion role, with the exception of studies by Bullard [ 30 ], Gui et al. [ 29 ], Helmer-Smith et al. [ 33 ], Hogan-Murphy et al. [ 46 ], Rea et al. [ 50 ], and Yuan et al. [ 31 ].

The 23 studies encompassed in this review utilized 20 different terms for the champion role. In most studies, the champion’s role was briefly described in terms of the duties it entailed or should entail. This may be linked to the fact that the role of champions was not the primary focus of the study, but rather one of the strategies in the implementation process being investigated. This result reinforces the conclusions drawn by Miech et al. [ 10 ] and Shea et al. [ 12 ] regarding the lack of united understandings of the concept. Furthermore, in Santos et al.‘s [ 19 ] review, champions were only operationalized through presence or absence in 71.4% of the included studies. However, our review finds that there is a consistent and shared understanding that champions should promote and support technology implementation.

Several studies advocate for champions as an effective and recommended strategy for implementing technology [ 30 , 31 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 42 , 43 , 45 , 46 ]. However, we identified that few studies exclusively explore health personnel`s experiences within the champion role when implementing technology in healthcare services.

This suggests a general lack of information essential for understanding the pros, cons, and prerequisites for champions as a strategy within this field of knowledge. However, this review identifies, on a general basis, the types of support and structures required for champions to perform their role successfully from the perspectives of health personnel, contributing to Shea’s conceptual model [ 12 ].

Regarding the organization of the role, this review identified champions holding both formal appointed and informal roles, working in management or clinical settings, being recruited for their clinical and/or technological expertise, and either volunteering or being hired with specific benefits for the role. Regardless of these variations, anchoring the role is crucial for both the individuals holding the champion role and the health personnel interacting with them. Anchoring, in this context, is associated with the clarity of the role’s content and a match between role expectations and opportunities for fulfilment. Furthermore, the role should be valued by the management, preferably through dedicated time and/or salary support [ 34 , 36 , 46 ]. Additionally, our findings indicate that relying on a “solo champion” is vulnerable to issues such as illness, turnover, excessive workload, and individual champion performance [ 32 , 37 ]. Based on these insights, it appears preferable to appoint multiple champions, with roles at both management and clinical levels [ 33 ].

Some studies have explored the selection of champions and its impact on role performance, revealing diverse experiences [ 30 , 31 ]. Notably, Bullard [ 30 ], stands out for emphasizing long clinical experience, and hiring newly trained nurses as superusers to facilitate the use of electronic health records. Despite facing initial reluctance, these newly trained nurses gradually succeeded in their roles. This underscores the importance of considering contextual factors in the champion selection [ 30 , 52 ]. In Bullard’s study [ 30 ], the collaboration between newly trained nurses as digital natives and clinical experienced health personnel proved beneficial, highlighting the need to align champion selection with the organization’s needs based on personal characteristics. This finding aligns with Melkas et al.‘s [ 9 ] argument that implementing technology requires a deeper understanding of users, access to contextual know-how, and health personnel’s tacit knowledge.

To meet role expectations and effectively leverage their professional and technological expertise, champions should embody personal qualities such as the ability to engage others, take a leadership role, be accessible, supportive, and communicate clearly. These qualities align with the key attributes for change in healthcare champions described by Bonawitz et al. [ 15 ]. These attributes include influence, ownership, physical presence, persuasiveness, grit, and a participative leadership style (p.5). These findings suggest that the active performance of the role, beyond mere presence, is crucial for champions to be a successful strategy in technology implementation. Moreover, the recruitment process is not inconsequential. Identifying the right person for the role and providing them with adequate training, organizational support, and dedicated time to fulfill their responsibilities emerge as an important factor based on the insights from champions and health personnel.

Strengths and limitations

While this study benefits from identifying various terms associated with the role of champions, it acknowledges the possibility of missing some studies as a result of diverse descriptions of the role. Nonetheless, a notable strength of the study lies in its specific focus on the health personnel’s experiences in holding the champion role and the broader experiences of health personnel concerning champions in technology implementation within healthcare services. This approach contributes valuable insights into the characteristics of experiences and attitudes toward the role of champions in implementing technology. Lastly, the study emphasizes the relationship between the experiences with the champion role and the organizational setting’s characteristics.

The champion role was frequently inadequately defined [ 30 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 39 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 51 ], aligning with previous reviews [ 17 , 19 , 21 ]. As indicated by van Laere and Aggestam [ 52 ], this lack of clarity complicates the identification and comparison of champions across studies. Studies that lacking a distinct definition of the champion’s role were consequently excluded. Only studies written in English were included, introducing the possibility of overlooking relevant studies based on our chosen terms for identifying the champion’s role. Most of the included studies focused on technology implementation in a general context, with champions being just one of several measures. This approach resulted in scant descriptions, as champions were often discussed in the results, discussion, or implications sections rather than being the central focus of the research.

As highlighted by Hall et al. [ 18 ]., methodological issues and inadequate reporting in studies of the champion role create challenges for conducting high-quality reviews, introducing uncertainty around the findings. We have adopted a similar approach to Santos et al. [ 19 ], including all studies even when some issues were identified during the quality assessment. Our review shares the same limitations as previous review by Santos et al. [ 19 ] on the champion role.

Practical implications, policy, and future research

The findings emphasize the significance of the relationship between experiences with the champion role and characteristics of organizational settings as crucial factors for success in the champion role. Clear anchoring of the role within the organization is vital and may impact routines, workflows, staffing, and budgets. Despite limited evidence on the experience of the champion’s role, volunteering, hiring newly graduated health personnel, and appointing more than one champion are identified as facilitators of technology implementation. This study underscores the need for future empirical research including clear descriptions of the champion roles, details on study settings and the technologies to be adopted. This will enable the determination of outcomes and success factors in holding champions in technology implementation processes, transferability of knowledge between contexts and technologies as well as enhance the comparability of studies. Furthermore, there is a need for studies to explore experiences with the champion role, preferably from the perspective of multiple stakeholders, as well as focus on the champion role within various healthcare settings.

This study emphasizes that champions can hold significant positions when provided with a clear mandate, dedicated time, and training, contributing their professional, technological, and personal competencies to expedite technology adoption within services. It appears to be an advantage if the health personnel volunteer or apply for the role to facilitate engaged and proactive champions. The implementation of technology in healthcare services demands efforts from the entire service, and the experiences highlighted in this review exhibits that champions can play an important role. Consequently, empirical studies dedicated to the champion role, employing robust designs based current knowledge, are still needed to provide solid understanding of how champions can be a successful initiative when implementing technology in healthcare services.

Data availability

This review relies exclusively on previously published studies. The datasets supporting the conclusions of this article are included within the article and its supplementary files: Description and characteristics of included studies in Table 1 , Study characteristics. The search strategy is provided in Appendix 1 , and the Critical Appraisal Summary of included studies utilizing MMAT is presented in Appendix 2 .

Abbreviations

Electronic Health Record

Implementation Outcomes Framework

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematics and Meta-Analysis

Meskó B, Drobni Z, Bényei É, Gergely B, Győrffy Z. Digital health is a cultural transformation of traditional healthcare. mHealth. 2017;3:38. https://doi.org/10.21037/mhealth.2017.08.07 .

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Pérez Sust P, Solans O, Fajardo JC, Medina Peralta M, Rodenas P, Gabaldà J, et al. Turning the crisis into an opportunity: Digital health strategies deployed during the COVID-19 outbreak. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020;6:e19106. https://doi.org/10.2196/19106 .

Alotaibi YK, Federico F. The impact of health information technology on patient safety. Saudi MedJ. 2017;38:117380. https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2017.12.20631 .

Article Google Scholar

Kuoppamäki S. The application and deployment of welfare technology in Swedish municipal care: a qualitative study of procurement practices among municipal actors. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21:918. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06944-w .

Kraus S, Schiavone F, Pluzhnikova A, Invernizzi AC. Digital transformation in healthcare: analyzing the current state-of-research. J Bus Res. 2021;123:557–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.030 .

Frennert S. Approaches to welfare technology in municipal eldercare. JTechnolHum. 2020;38:22646. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228835.2020.1747043 .

Konttila J, Siira H, Kyngäs H, Lahtinen M, Elo S, Kääriäinen M, et al. Healthcare professionals’ competence in digitalisation: a systematic review. Clin Nurs. 2019;28:74561. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14710 .

Jacob C, Sanchez-Vazquez A, Ivory C. Social, organizational, and technological factors impacting clinicians’ adoption of mobile health tools: systematic literature review. JMIR mHealth uHealth. 2020;8:e15935. https://doi.org/10.2196/15935 .

Melkas H, Hennala L, Pekkarinen S, Kyrki V. Impacts of robot implementation on care personnel and clients in elderly-care institutions. Int J Med Inf. 2020;134:104041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.104041 .

Miech EJ, Rattray NA, Flanagan ME, Damschroder L, Schmid AA, Damush TM. Inside help: an integrative review of champions in healthcare-related implementation. SAGE Open Med. 2018;6. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050312118773261 .

Foong HF, Kyaw BM, Upton Z, Tudor Car L. Facilitators and barriers of using digital technology for the management of diabetic foot ulcers: a qualitative systematic review. Int Wound J. 2020;17:126681. https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.13396 .

Shea CM. A conceptual model to guide research on the activities and effects of innovation champions. Implement Res Pract. 2021;2. https://doi.org/10.1177/2633489521990443 .

Hudson D. Physician engagement strategies in health information system implementations. Healthc Manage Forum. 2023;36:86–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/08404704221131921 .

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Gullslett MK, Strand Bergmo T. Implementation of E-prescription for multidose dispensed drugs: qualitative study of general practitioners’’ experiences. JMIR HumFactors. 2022;9:e27431. https://doi.org/10.2196/27431 .

Bonawitz K, Wetmore M, Heisler M, Dalton VK, Damschroder LJ, Forman J, et al. Champions in context: which attributes matter for change efforts in healthcare? Implement Sci. 2020;15:62. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-020-01024-9 .

George ER, Sabin LL, Elliott PA, Wolff JA, Osani MC, McSwiggan Hong J, et al. Examining health care champions: a mixed-methods study exploring self and peer perspectives of champions. Implement Res Pract. 2022;3. https://doi.org/10.1177/26334895221077880 .

Shea CM, Belden CM. What is the extent of research on the characteristics, behaviors, and impacts of health information technology champions? A scoping review. BMC Med Inf Decis Mak. 2016;16:2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-016-0240-4 .

Hall AM, Flodgren GM, Richmond HL, Welsh S, Thompson JY, Furlong BM, Sherriff A. Champions for improved adherence to guidelines in long-term care homes: a systematic review. Implement Sci Commun. 2021;2(1):85–85. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-021-00185-y .

Santos WJ, Graham ID, Lalonde M, Demery Varin M, Squires JE. The effectiveness of champions in implementing innovations in health care: a systematic review. Implement Sci Commun. 2022;3(1):1–80. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-022-00315-0 .

Wood K, Giannopoulos V, Louie E, Baillie A, Uribe G, Lee KS, Haber PS, Morley KC. The role of clinical champions in facilitating the use of evidence-based practice in drug and alcohol and mental health settings: a systematic review. Implement Res Pract. 2020;1:2633489520959072–2633489520959072. https://doi.org/10.1177/2633489520959072 .

Rigby K, Redley B, Hutchinson AM. Change agent’s role in facilitating use of technology in residential aged care: a systematic review. Int J Med Informatics. 2023;105216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2023.105216 .

Pluye P, Hong QN. Combining the power of stories and the power of numbers: mixed methods research and mixed studies reviews. Annu Rev Public Health. 2014;35:29–45. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032013-182440 .

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 .

Pettersen S, Berg A, Eide H. Experiences and attitudes to the role of champions in implementation of technology in health services. A systematic review. PROSPERO. 2022. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022335750 . Accessed [15 Feb 2023].

Covidence. Better Syst Rev Manag. https://www.covidence.org/ . 2023;26.

Hong QN, Fàbregues S, Bartlett G, Boardman F, Cargo M, Dagenais P, et al. The mixed methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. Educ Inf. 2018;34:285–91. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-180221 .

Braun V, Clarke V. Thematic analysis: a practical guide. 1st ed. SAGE; 2022.

Iqbal MP, Manias E, Mimmo L, Mears S, Jack B, Hay L, Harrison R. Clinicians’ experience of providing care: a rapid review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05812-3 .

Gui X, Chen Y, Zhou X, Reynolds TL, Zheng K, Hanauer DA. Physician champions’ perspectives and practices on electronic health records implementation: challenges and strategies. JAMIA open. 2020;3:5361. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamiaopen/ooz051 .

Bullard KL. Cost effective staffing for an EHR implementation. Nurs Econ. 2016;34:726.

Google Scholar

Yuan CT, Bradley EH, Nembhard IM. A mixed methods study of how clinician ‘super users’ influence others during the implementation of electronic health records. BMC Med Inf Decis Mak. 2015;15:26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-015-0154-6 .

Owens C, Charles N. Implementation of a text-messaging intervention for adolescents who self-harm (TeenTEXT): a feasibility study using normalisation process theory. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2016;10:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13034-016-0101-z .

Helmer-Smith M, Fung C, Afkham A, Crowe L, Gazarin M, Keely E, et al. The feasibility of using electronic consultation in long-term care homes. JAm Med Dir Assoc. 2020;21:11661170e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2020.03.003 .

Orchard J, Lowres N, Freedman SB, Ladak L, Lee W, Zwar N, et al. Screening for atrial fibrillation during influenza vaccinations by primary care nurses using a smartphone electrocardiograph (iECG): a feasibility study. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2016;23:13–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/2047487316670255 .

Bee P, Lovell K, Airnes Z, Pruszynska A. Embedding telephone therapy in statutory mental health services: a qualitative, theory-driven analysis. BMC Psychiatry. 2016;16:56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-016-0761-5 .

Fontaine P, Whitebird R, Solberg LI, Tillema J, Smithson A, Crabtree BF. Minnesota’s early experience with medical home implementation: viewpoints from the front lines. J Gen Intern Med. 2015;30(7):899–906. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-014-3136-y .

Kolltveit B-CH, Gjengedal E, Graue M, Iversen MM, Thorne S, Kirkevold M. Conditions for success in introducing telemedicine in diabetes foot care: a qualitative inquiry. BMC Nurs. 2017;16:2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-017-0201-y .

Salbach NM, McDonald A, MacKay-Lyons M, Bulmer B, Howe JA, Bayley MT, et al. Experiences of physical therapists and professional leaders with implementing a toolkit to advance walking assessment poststroke: a realist evaluation. Phys Ther. 2021;101:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzab232 .

Schwarz M, Coccetti A, Draheim M, Gordon G. Perceptions of allied health staff of the implementation of an integrated electronic medical record across regional and metropolitan settings. Aust Health Rev. 2020;44:965–72. https://doi.org/10.1071/AH19024 .

Stewart J, McCorry N, Reid H, Hart N, Kee F. Implementation of remote asthma consulting in general practice in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: an evaluation using extended normalisation process theory. BJGP Open. 2022;6:1–10. https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2021.0189 .

Bennett-Levy J, Singer J, DuBois S, Hyde K. Translating mental health into practice: what are the barriers and enablers to e-mental health implementation by aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health professionals? JMed. Internet Res. 2017;19:e1. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6269 .

Olsen J, Peterson S, Stevens A. Implementing electronic health record-based National Diabetes Prevention Program referrals in a rural county. Public Health Nurs (Boston Mass). 2021;38(3):464–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/phn.12860 .

Yang L, Brown-Johnson CG, Miller-Kuhlmann R, Kling SMR, Saliba-Gustafsson EA, Shaw JG, et al. Accelerated launch of video visits in ambulatory neurology during COVID-19: key lessons from the Stanford experience. Neurology. 2020;95:305–11. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000010015 .

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Buckingham SA, Sein K, Anil K, Demain S, Gunn H, Jones RB, et al. Telerehabilitation for physical disabilities and movement impairment: a service evaluation in South West England. JEval Clin Pract. 2022;28:108495. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.13689 .

Chung OS, Robinson T, Johnson AM, Dowling NL, Ng CH, Yücel M, et al. Implementation of therapeutic virtual reality into psychiatric care: clinicians’ and service managers’’ perspectives. Front Psychiatry. 2022;12:791123. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.791123 .

Hogan-Murphy D, Stewart D, Tonna A, Strath A, Cunningham S. Use of normalization process theory to explore key stakeholders’ perceptions of the facilitators and barriers to implementing electronic systems for medicines management in hospital settings. Res SocialAdm Pharm. 2021;17:398405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2020.03.005 .

Moss SR, Martinez KA, Nathan C, Pfoh ER, Rothberg MB. Physicians’ views on utilization of an electronic health record-embedded calculator to assess risk for venous thromboembolism among medical inpatients: a qualitative study. TH Open. 2022;6:e33–9. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1742227 .

Yusof MM. A case study evaluation of a critical Care Information System adoption using the socio-technical and fit approach. Int J Med Inf. 2015;84:486–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2015.03.001 .

Dugstad J, Sundling V, Nilsen ER, Eide H. Nursing staff’s evaluation of facilitators and barriers during implementation of wireless nurse call systems in residential care facilities. A cross-sectional study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20:163. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-4998-9 .

Rea K, Le-Jenkins U, Rutledge C. A technology intervention for nurses engaged in preventing catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Comput Inf Nurs. 2018;36:305–13. https://doi.org/10.1097/CIN.0000000000000429 .

Bail K, Davey R, Currie M, Gibson J, Merrick E, Redley B. Implementation pilot of a novel electronic bedside nursing chart: a mixed-methods case study. Aust Health Rev. 2020;44:672–6. https://doi.org/10.1071/AH18231 .

van Laere J, Aggestam L. Understanding champion behaviour in a health-care information system development project – how multiple champions and champion behaviours build a coherent whole. Eur J Inf Syst. 2016;25:47–63. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2015.5 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the librarian Malin E. Norman, at Nord university, for her assistance in the development of the search, as well as guidance regarding the scientific databases.

This study is a part of a PhD project undertaken by the first author, SP, and funded by Nord University, Norway. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, as well as not-for-profit sectors.

Open access funding provided by Nord University

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Nursing and Health Sciences, Nord university, P.O. Box 474, N-7801, Namsos, Norway

Sissel Pettersen & Anita Berg

Centre for Health and Technology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of South-Eastern Norway, PO Box 7053, N-3007, Drammen, Norway

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

The first author/SP has been the project manager and was mainly responsible for all phases of the study. The second and third authors HE and AB have contributed to screening, quality assessment, analysis and discussion of findings. Drafting of the final manuscript has been a collaboration between the first/SP and third athor/AB. The final manuscript has been approved by all authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sissel Pettersen .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This review does not involve the processing of personal data, and given the nature of this study, formal consent is not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Supplementary material 2, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Pettersen, S., Eide, H. & Berg, A. The role of champions in the implementation of technology in healthcare services: a systematic mixed studies review. BMC Health Serv Res 24 , 456 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-10867-7

Download citation

Received : 19 June 2023

Accepted : 14 March 2024

Published : 11 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-10867-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Technology implementation
Healthcare personnel
Healthcare services
Mixed methods
Organizational characteristics
Technology adoption
Role definitions
Healthcare settings
Systematic review

BMC Health Services Research

ISSN: 1472-6963

General enquiries: [email protected]

IMAGES

How to Find Scopus Indexed Journals 2024
Scopus for Journal Ranking
How To Search Research Papers On Scopus.Basic To Advanced Search by
New Scopus Article Metrics: A better way to benchmark articles
How to Publish a Research Paper in Scopus Publication 2023
Scopus search

VIDEO

SCOPUS 4: Combining Search Lines
Add scopus article
How to search Scopus indexed journals for article submission
Full text or abstract database Find out what Scopus and ScienceDirect are all about
Lecture(20)Scopus Research Engine _ سكوبس كمحرك بحثي
Scopus

COMMENTS

Scopus
Scopus
Scopus search
Scopus' literature search is built to distill massive amounts of information down to the most relevant documents and information in less time. With Scopus you can search and filter results in the following ways: . Document search: Search directly from the homepage and use detailed search options to ensure you find the document (s) you want.
Scopus
Scopus outperforms other abstract and citation databases by providing a broader range of research metrics covering nearly twice the number of peer-reviewed publications. Using Scopus metrics, you can demonstrate the influence of your institution's scholarly output. Discover the details behind our metrics, giving you confidence in knowing how ...
Scopus
Scopus is the world's leading platform for research and academic information, offering comprehensive and reliable data on publications, authors, and citations. Whether you are looking for the latest research in your field, exploring potential collaborators, or evaluating the impact of your work, Scopus can help you find what you need.
How do I search in Scopus?
Published: Limit your search to articles published within a range of years (inclusive). Added to Scopus in the last no. days: Limit your search to documents that have been added to Scopus in the last 7, 14, or 30 days. Document type. Use the document type list to limit your search to a specific type of document, such as reviews or conference ...
Scopus
About Scopus. Scopus is the largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature: scientific journals, books and conference proceedings. Delivering a comprehensive overview of the world's research output in the fields of science, technology, medicine, social sciences, and arts and humanities, Scopus features smart tools to track ...
Using Scopus
Scopus is an abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature and web sources with tools to track, analyze, and visualize research. Scopus provides access to a broad portfolio of peer-reviewed content from around the world. Scopus includes the records from the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, among other included sources. Scopus uses four broad subject areas: Physical Sciences, Health ...
Searching Scopus
Enter your search terms into the Search documents box [1] By default, Scopus will search in the Article title, Abstract and Keywords of documents. You can specify in which fields to search using the drop-down menu [2] Use the +Add search field [3] option to add additional fields. Each new search field is combined using the Boolean operators AND ...
Scopus
Your brilliance, connected. Scopus uniquely combines a comprehensive, expertly curated abstract and citation database with enriched data and linked scholarly literature across a wide variety of disciplines. Scopus quickly finds relevant and authoritative research, identifies experts and provides access to reliable data, metrics and analytical ...
How can I best use the Advanced search?
On the Advanced search form, click the Author name or affiliation link. The Make Author or Affiliation Selection page opens: FOR AUTHORS: On the Make Author or Affiliation Selection page, enter the author's last name and, if available, the first name or initial. Select 'Show exact matches only' to find authors that match exactly the name you entered in the Author Last Name and Initials or ...
Scopus
Scopus. The following steps outline how you can do a cited reference search in Scopus: 1. Enter a few citation details into the main search page. The most efficient way to search is to enter the article title in the first box. In the next search box, enter the author's last name. 2.
Scopus
Search for articles and chapters from the full Scopus list of sources; Search within option allows for searching for cited references; Author Search for specific authors published in Scopus sources; Affiliations Search for an institution (e.g. university) name and display all articles affiliated with that institution; Sources
MAT136
This will instruct Scopus to look for your search terms in the title of the article, in the abstract of the article, and the in keywords of the article. The abstract of the article is a short summary of what the article is about and the keywords are search terms connected to the article that are often supplied by the author.
Scopus
Scopus is a powerful abstract and citation database owned by Elsevier and maintained since 2004. It has some powerful tools for researchers, students, and administrators to discover research, trends, and insights. It indexes over 2.4 billion citations, 94 million records, 29,000 titles, and 330,000 books.
Scopus
Provides complete reference list for covered journals, robust citation tracing tools and research metrics. Includes selected book chapters and conference proceedings. Scopus covers a very large but selective list of key academic journals from all disciplines. Documents: articles from 26,000 selected high-quality/leading peer-reviewed journals.
Document Search
Document Search. Document Search is the default search page in Scopus. Select from a variety of search fields including article title, abstract, keyword, author name, publication date, and references. Scopus searches the bibliographic record, not the full-text of documents. Watch our tutorial below for more information:
Find Articles
Scopus searches the bibliographic record (not full text articles). The default document search is title/abstract/keyword. Use the dropdown menu next to the search bar to select a different search field. Keywords include those provided by authors, and index keywords from MeSH, Emtree or Compendex. Choose search terms which are specific or ...
Google Scholar
Google Scholar provides a simple way to broadly search for scholarly literature. Search across a wide variety of disciplines and sources: articles, theses, books, abstracts and court opinions.
Find a journal
Elsevier Journal Finder helps you find journals that could be best suited for publishing your scientific article. Journal Finder uses smart search technology and field-of-research specific vocabularies to match your paper's abstract to scientific journals.
The best academic research databases [Update 2024]
Organize your papers in one place. Try Paperpile. 1. Scopus. Scopus is one of the two big commercial, bibliographic databases that cover scholarly literature from almost any discipline. Besides searching for research articles, Scopus also provides academic journal rankings, author profiles, and an h-index calculator. 2.
How to search for article on Scopus?
This video describes the steps needed to search for an article on Scopus, learn how to limit your search to obtain the best results. Click on this link to su...
ScienceDirect.com
3.3 million articles on ScienceDirect are open access. Articles published open access are peer-reviewed and made freely available for everyone to read, download and reuse in line with the user license displayed on the article. ScienceDirect is the world's leading source for scientific, technical, and medical research.
Changes to Scopus Open Access (OA) document tagging
However, our implementation differed slightly due to the application of some additional, more strict rules for Scopus. Starting April 2024, we will change the Scopus OA tagging policy to fully align with the Unpaywall definitions. This policy will also affect Scopus and other databases using article level OA tags including SciVal and Compendex.
Is interdisciplinarity more likely to produce novel or disruptive research?
Based on the F1000 Prime database and Scopus datasets accessed via ICSR Lab, F1000 novelty tags and two disruption indices (DI1 and DI5) were used in this study for the assessment of research quality and contribution, and it was explored whether interdisciplinarity is more likely to produce novel or disruptive research.
The role of champions in the implementation of technology in healthcare
Data extraction. The research team developed an extraction form for the included studies utilizing an Excel spreadsheet. Following data extraction, the information included the Name of Author(s) Year of publication, Country/countries, Title of the article, Setting, Aim, Design, Participants, and Sample size of the studies, Technology utilized in healthcare services, name/title utilized to ...
Neurological Research in 47 Asian Countries
Neurology research in the Asian region has seen significant growth and development over the past decade, yet comprehensive analyses of its progress remain scarce. This study aims to address this gap by providing a detailed examination of neurology research in 47 Asian countries from 2013 to 2022. Data was extracted from the Scopus database, encompassing scholarly output, citations, and ...
EJ1396593
Aim/Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the extant research on data science education (DSE) to identify the existing gaps, opportunities, and challenges, and make recommendations for current and future DSE. Background: There has been an increase in the number of data science programs especially because of the increased appreciation of data as a multidisciplinary strategic resource.

Searching Scopus: Using Scopus

About Scopus

Search Form

Adapted from Rush University Library's "Scopus User Guide"

To set a new search alert:

To set an author alert:

To set a document alert:

Search & Find

Places & Spaces

Support & Guides

Scopus LibGuide: Searching Scopus

Document search

Document results page

Export results

Analyze search results

Search Tips

Secondary documents

Cited reference search

Open Access filters

Your brilliance, connected.

Academic Institutions ­ ­ ­

Government & Funding Agencies

Research & Development

How Scopus works

What our customers say

Why choose Scopus

Other helpful resources

How can I best use the Advanced search?

Tips for proximity operators:

Was this answer helpful?

Related Articles:

How do I find articles?

Research Guides

Introduction to Scopus and Web of Science

Finding Scopus and Web of Science

Start your Search

Further Refining your Search

After Identifying an Article of Interest

References and Citations

Web of Science

Library links

Connect with us

Citation Databases

Introduction to Scopus

Scopus Uses for Researchers

Metrics in Scopus

Scopus - Article, Citation, & Research Impact Database

Library Liaison

Scopus Content and Overview

Scopus Key Features

Scopus Quick Links

University Library, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Scopus: Document Search

Document Search

Author Search

Search Tips

The top list of academic research databases

2. Web of Science

tree-logo-small-v2.png

You are here

Follow Scopus

Recent Posts

OA Tagging chart.png

Is interdisciplinarity more likely to produce novel or disruptive research?

Cite this article

Access this article

Acknowledgements

Author information

Corresponding author

Ethics declarations

Additional information

Rights and permissions

About this article

Share this article

The role of champions in the implementation of technology in healthcare services: a systematic mixed studies review

Conclusions

Search strategy and study selection

Eligibility criteria

Study selection

Data extraction

Academic Institutions