Friends, Just revised Google Scholar < http://scholar.google.com > last week. Noticed that it has improved a lot. Just searched for "OpenMED@NIC" <http://snipurl.com/mz7n > It gave 925 hits. Not bad considering thatOpenMED@NIC < http://openmed.nic.in > has around 1015 documents. Whatfacinated me was that it presented link "Cited by" along with thehits. Clicking those showed all the articles citing an article inquestion in OpenMED@NIC. No wonder Dean Giustini of Biomedical Branch Library, VancouverHospital & Health Sciences Centre, writes in his blog an item - GoogleScholar Rivals Web of Science <http://weblogs.elearning.ubc.ca/googlescholar/archives/023377.html >comparing Web of Science with Google Scholar. He refers to an articleby Daniel Pauly and Konstantinos I. Stergiou entitled "Equivalence ofresults from two citation analyses: Thomson ISI's Citation Index andGoogle's Scholar service. ETHICS IN SCIENCE AND ENVIRONMENTALPOLITICS, 2005:33–35 Published December 22 <http://www.int-res.com/articles/esep/2005/E65.pdf >. "Citation counts were performed across a wide range of disciplinesusing both the Thomson ISI files and Google Scholar, and shown to leadto essentially the same results, in spite of their different methodsfor identifying citing sources. This has strong implications forfuture citation analyses, and the many promotion, tenure and fundingdecisions based thereon, notably because ISI products are rathercostly, while Google Scholar is free." However one thing irritates me - it shows the following text in hitsof OpenMED@NIC."@import url(http://openmed.nic.in/eprints.css"Google could have done better to render the CSS better from the Eprintbased repository. --Sukhdev Singh, NIC.http://openmed.nic.in