| Summary: | <span>In this article, the parameters used by RedALyC, Catalogo Latindex, SciELO, Scopus and Web of Science for the incorporation of scientific journals in their collections are analyzed with the goal of proving their relation with the objectives of each database in addition of debating the valuation that the scientific society is giving to those systems as decisive of "scientific quality". The used indicators are classified in: 1) Editorial quality (formal aspects or editorial management). 2) Content quality (peer review or originality) and 3) Visibility (prestige of editors and editorial use and impact, accessibility and indexing) It is revealed that: a) between 9 and 16% of the indicators are related to the quality of content; b) Lack specificity in their definition and determination of measure systems, and c) match the goals of each base, although a marked trend towards formal aspects related and visibility is observed. Thus makes it clear that these systems pursuing their own objectives, making a core of journals of “quality” for its readership. We conclude, therefore, that the presence or absence of a journal in these collections is not sufficient to determine the quality of scientific magazine and its contents parameter.</span>
|
|---|
