Thanks for visiting Research Information.

You're trying to access an editorial feature that is only available to logged in, registered users of Research Information. Registering is completely free, so why not sign up with us?

By registering, as well as being able to browse all content on the site without further interruption, you'll also have the option to receive our magazine (multiple times a year) and our email newsletters.

Over a quarter of a million CrossMark records added

Share this on social media:

CrossRef has announced that more than 270,000 documents now have CrossMark version status information. Most, it says, also display 'the distinctive logo that provides researchers information both about existing changes to scholarly articles and about important publication record information'. More than 100,000 of these records were added in the month of October alone and scholars click on CrossMark records displayed on PDF and HTML articles an average of 50,000 times a month, says the organisation. 

CrossRef accepted its first CrossMark data from publishers 18 months ago and now 24 publishers participate in the initiative. The publishers with the highest number of CrossMark records include those from the original pilot, such as Elsevier Science, the International Union of Crystallography, the American Institute of Physics, The Royal Society, and Wiley. Wiley currently has the highest number of reader views (or clicks) per CrossMark record.

'We're very pleased to see the increased uptake of CrossMark among our members,' commented CrossRef's executive director Ed Pentz. 'These publishers have worked hard - sometimes on their own, sometimes with their vendors - to codify content changes and to locate and standardise important non-bibliographic metadata. Now they are beginning to see the benefits, as their readers access this important information in a standard way across publishers. We're also encouraged by the increasing support from vendors in our affiliate community, who are making this valuable service possible.'