The document discusses the significance and applications of event data in tracking scholarly content and its interactions on the web. It highlights how various stakeholders, including funders, researchers, and publishers, can leverage this data for metrics, analysis, and improving discoverability. Key issues like broken links from unregistered DOIs and the necessity of early content registration are also addressed.

1. Event Data
& other new
services

2. Article

3. Article
Blog

4. Article
Blog
Tweet

5. Article
Blog
Tweet
Wikipedia page

6. Article
Blog
Tweet
Wikipedia page
Dataset

7. Article
Blog
Tweet
Wikipedia page
Dataset

8. What does this have to
do with Event Data?

9. Article
Blog
Tweet
Wikipedia
Datasets

10. Event Data provides a unique record of the
web activity related to individual scholarly
content items.

13. Where does our data come from?

14. The Crossref Event Data Pipeline
Data
Contributors
Event Data
API

15. Great, you’re making
more metrics?
No metrics
No totals
No scores
No interpretation
(Also: no user interface)

16. Event Data tracks interaction

17. Graph modelling
Data visualisations
Discoverability
Recommendation
Bibliometrics
Altmetrics
Linked data

18. Use the data to…
Funders can use Event Data to isolate and track the dissemination and usage of the
research they funded
Build a reading recommendation tool for researchers by using Event Data to analyse
co-citations in Wikipedia
Publishers can undertake metric-lead analysis to help drive business needs
Notify an organization that their research is trending
Researchers can analyze data from blogs and social media to help with preprint
discoverability and impact analysis
Publishing service providers can feed Event Data in their usage or altmetrics
dashboards or visualisations

19. Want to take a look at Beta?
Read the User Guide to learn more about how to use the Beta
service https://www.eventdata.crossref.org/guide/

21. Early content
registration

22. Current Issues
• broken links from unregistered DOIs undermine trust in
persistent links and availability of content
• publishers-
• cannot meet funder mandates that focus on acceptance
point for reporting
• advance publicity & press leave out DOIs or lead to broken
links
• researchers - cannot provide evidence of all publications in
grant and employment applications
• funders & institutions - cannot fully track research they support

23. Soon
Acceptance Publication
Early Content Registration
• DOI is ‘live’
• Intent to publish statement
displayed (Crossref-hosted)
Full Content Registration
• DOI resolves to publication
• Intent to publish statement is
replaced

24. Metadata Requirements
Must include
• DOI
• Date of acceptance
• Publisher name
• Journal/Book/Conference title
• "Intent to publish” statement
(provided by publisher or Crossref
in its absence)
Should include
• Funding information (Open
Funder Registry)
• ORCID iDs
• License
• Author affiliation
• ISSN/ISBN
•
May include
• Publisher logo
• Custom "intent to publish”
statement
• Publication title
• Item title (e.g. article title)

25. Conference IDs

26. Motivation
https://www.crossref.org/blog/taking-the-con-out-of-conferences/
Fake conferences that emerge, similar conference names

27. Next steps
Sanity check to see if we can produce a data model and coordinate any work
that is done on conference, project and organization identifiers.
Joint Crossref/DataCite working group to specifically explore conference and
project identifiers and determine how they relate both to each other and to our
already ongoing work with ORCID on organization identifiers.
Likely that the working group will discuss and explore how conference/project
identifiers might be used for increasing the transparency of peer review at
conferences, better attribution for programme chairs and program committee
members, and how they might be incorporated into other services.
Interested? community@crossref.org

28. Questions?