Latest blog posts
Martin Eve
2023 September 28

Feedback on Automatic Digital Preservation and Self-Healing DOIs

Thank you to everyone who responded with feedback on the Op Cit proposal. This post clarifies, defends, and amends the original proposal in light of the responses that have been sent. We have endeavoured to respond to every point that was raised, either here or in the document comments themselves. We strongly prefer for this to be developed in collaboration with CLOCKSS, LOCKSS, and/or Portico, i.e. through established preservation services that already have existing arrangements in place, are properly funded, and understand the problem space.

...Find out more
Lucy Ofiesh
2023 September 27

2023 board election slate

I’m pleased to share the 2023 board election slate. Crossref’s Nominating Committee received 87 submissions from members worldwide to fill seven open board seats. We maintain a balance of eight large member seats and eight small member seats. A member’s size is determined based on the membership fee tier they pay. We look at how our total revenue is generated across the membership tiers and split it down the middle. Like last year, about half of our revenue came from members in the tiers $0 - $1,650, and the other half came from members in tiers $3,900 - $50,000.

...Find out more
Ginny Hendricks
2023 September 12

News: Crossref and Retraction Watch

https://doi.org/10.13003/c23rw1d9 Crossref acquires Retraction Watch data and opens it for the scientific community Agreement to combine and publicly distribute data about tens of thousands of retracted research papers, and grow the service together 12th September 2023 —– The Center for Scientific Integrity, the organisation behind the Retraction Watch blog and database, and Crossref, the global infrastructure underpinning research communications, both not-for-profits, announced today that the Retraction Watch database has been acquired by Crossref and made a public resource.

...Find out more
Amanda French
2023 September 07

Open Funder Registry to transition into Research Organization Registry (ROR)

Today, we are announcing a long-term plan to deprecate the Open Funder Registry. For some time, we have understood that there is significant overlap between the Funder Registry and the Research Organization Registry (ROR), and funders and publishers have been asking us whether they should use Funder IDs or ROR IDs to identify funders. It has therefore become clear that merging the two registries will make workflows more efficient and less confusing for all concerned.

...Find out more
  • Menu
search

Documentation

Reports

Our reports are tools to help you evaluate and improve your metadata. The dashboard gives an overview of our ever-growing corpus of metadata. How good is your metadata? Find out using Participation Reports and other reports to evaluate your metadata records, check for any issues, and learn how to resolve them.

Some reports are sent to you by email, and some are available on our website.

Reports by email

We send reports by email from reports@crossref.org to specific contacts on your account. Do add this address to your email contacts list or safe senders list to ensure that you receive them. These reports are intended to help you keep your metadata records up-to-date, and include:

  • Conflict report - this report shows where two (or more) DOIs have been submitted with the same metadata, indicating that you may have duplicate DOIs. You’ll start receiving conflict reports if you have at least one conflict. These reports are sent out on a monthly basis, or more frequently if your number of conflicts peaks by over 500, and it is sent to the main Technical contact on your account.
  • DOI error report - a DOI error report is sent immediately when a user informs us that they’ve seen a DOI somewhere which doesn’t resolve to a website, and it is sent to the main Technical contact on your account.
  • Resolution report - this monthly report shows the number of successful and failed DOI resolutions for the previous month, and it is sent to the Primary contact on your account (please note - this contact used to be known as the Business contact).
  • Schematron report - the main Technical contact on your account may also receive periodic Schematron reports if there’s a metadata quality issue with your records.

If you aren’t receiving reports, please check the emails aren’t being caught by your spam filter. It might also be because we our contact information for your organization is not current, or you aren’t the designated reports person in our database. Please contact us and we’ll sort it out for you.

If you are not the appropriate person to receive reports, we can send reports to a different email address. If you don’t find our reports useful, please contact us and we’ll see what we can do.

If you need information about something that’s not covered by your reports, please explore all the information you can access through our REST API, or contact us for help.

Reports available on our website

These reports are available on our website:

Page owner: Isaac Farley   |   Last updated 2021-October-17