Digital Science launches self-citation screening tool – Research Information

The essential link between publishers, librarians and researchers.
Digital Science has expanded its research integrity portfolio with the launch of Dimensions Citation Check, an API-based tool designed to help journal editors identify and assess self-citation in manuscript submissions.
The new product automatically analyses submitted manuscripts, detects instances of self-citation, evaluates them within their textual context, and provides editors with a risk rating intended to support editorial decision-making.
While self-citation is a common and often legitimate, excessive or inappropriate self-citation can artificially inflate citation metrics, diminish perceptions of originality, and potentially affect a journal’s standing with indexing services. Traditionally, identifying problematic self-citation has required manual review of references by editors and editorial staff.
According to Digital Science, Citation Check automates this process by analysing manuscript PDFs and:
The company says the tool can be integrated into existing manuscript submission systems via API and supports batch processing, making it suitable for publishers handling large submission volumes.
Leslie McIntosh, VP of Research Integrity & Security at Digital Science, said: “Editorial teams need easier ways to reach more confident decisions – and citations are a core component of trusted research. Context determines whether a citation is legitimate or problematic, and that judgment needs to be delivered quickly and consistently, at scale. Dimensions Citation Check gives editorial teams an objective, evidence-based signal – with integrity screening becoming part of the normal workflow.”
Bob Schijvenaars, VP of Data Science & Infrastructure at Digital Science, added: “Dimensions has always been about turning connected research data into something actionable and meaningful. Citation Check draws on the depth and accuracy of the Dimensions database to resolve references and author identities reliably, and provide editors with context they can act on with confidence. That combination – scale, accuracy, and contextual assessment – is what distinguishes this from simpler reference-counting approaches.”
Be first to read the lastest industry news and analysis! SUBSCRIBE to the Research Information Newsline!

source