Skip to content

Commit 56794fa

Browse files
docs: add NLM Catalog integration assessment (#1041)
Comprehensive evaluation of NLM Catalog (National Library of Medicine) as a potential data source for biomedical journal assessment. Key findings: - Strong legitimacy signal for biomedical journals (MEDLINE indexing) - Fraud detection capability (verify fake MEDLINE claims) - Low implementation cost (1-2 developer days) - Domain limitation: 70-80% of queries outside biomedical scope - Recommendation: IMPLEMENT (low priority) - Mission alignment score: 7/10 Assessment follows same format as existing evaluations (ROR, OpenAPC). [AI-assisted] Co-authored-by: florath-ai-assistant[bot] <Andreas.Florath@telekom.de>
1 parent 6bdc1d5 commit 56794fa

File tree

2 files changed

+692
-0
lines changed

2 files changed

+692
-0
lines changed

docs/future-integrations/README.md

Lines changed: 11 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -13,11 +13,22 @@ Each file in this directory documents:
1313

1414
## Current Assessments
1515

16+
- **[nlm-catalog.md](nlm-catalog.md)** - NLM Catalog (National Library of Medicine) integration assessment
17+
- **Status**: Recommended / Low Priority
18+
- **Reason**: Strong legitimacy signal for biomedical journals, fraud detection for fake MEDLINE claims, low implementation cost (1-2 days)
19+
- **Limitation**: Domain-specific (biomedical only, 20-30% of queries), 70-80% of queries irrelevant
20+
- **Implement when**: After core pattern analyzers are robust, or when biomedical user demand is clear
21+
1622
- **[openapc.md](openapc.md)** - OpenAPC (Article Processing Charges) integration assessment
1723
- **Status**: Deferred / Low Priority
1824
- **Reason**: Limited coverage (5-15% of queries), weak signal for predatory detection, cost data ≠ quality indicator
1925
- **Reconsider if**: Scope expands to include cost transparency, user demand, or for research use cases
2026

27+
- **[ror.md](ror.md)** - ROR (Research Organization Registry) integration assessment
28+
- **Status**: Not Recommended
29+
- **Reason**: Fundamental mismatch (institutions ≠ journals), catastrophically low coverage (<10%), extremely weak signal, massive complexity (2,437 LOC, 7 tables)
30+
- **Related**: PR #1034 fully implemented and tested ROR integration before rejection
31+
2132
## Adding New Assessments
2233

2334
When evaluating a new potential integration:

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)