Academic and professional research travels further if it’s linked to the millions of other published papers. Crossref members register content with us to let the world know it exists, instead of creating thousands of bilateral agreements.
They send information called metadata to us. Metadata includes fields like dates, titles, authors, affiliations, funders, and online location. It also includes digital object identifiers (DOIs) that stay with the work even if it moves websites.
Richer metadata makes content useful and easier to find. Participation Reports (beta) give a clear picture for anyone to see the metadata Crossref has. See for yourself where the gaps are, and what our members could improve upon. Understand best practice through seeing what others are doing, and learn how to level-up.
Through Crossref, members are distributing their metadata downstream, making it available to numerous systems and organizations that together help credit and cite the work, report impact of funding, track outcomes and activity, and more.
Members maintain and update metadata long-term, telling us if content moves to a new website, and they include more information as time goes on. This means that there is a growing chance that content is found, cited, linked to, included in assessment, and used by other researchers.
This is Crossref infrastructure. You can’t see infrastructure, yet research—and researchers all over the world—rely on it.
Watch the introductory animation in your language:
All our members are encouraged to register and update the fullest possible metadata. Metadata can be registered either by members themselves, or agents acting on their behalf—such as hosting platforms. Content can be registered manually or by machine in the following ways:
It is important to note that while we collect, preserve and make metadata available for the scholarly community, we do not correct, edit, or change submitted metadata.
We store metadata and DOIs for many types of research-related content. The content types that we currently accept are below. If you have a content type that isn’t listed please contact us. At the moment we’re developing schemas for conferences and projects.
If you’re new to Content Registration we encourage you to verify and test your XML prior to submission.
Please see the Get started guide for details.
As this summary shows, the process of registering content and depositing metadata is relatively straightforward:
Once processed, the DOI is live and clickable after the deposit has been processed (usually within minutes) and the metadata is available for use in systems throughout scholarly communications.
To make publications discoverable—and to derive the greatest benefit from Crossref membership—we ask our members to deposit as much rich metadata as possible.
Richer metadata includes information such as journal title, article author, publication date, page numbers, ISSN, references, abstracts, ORCID iDs, funding information, clinical trials numbers, license information (access indicators for text and data mining) and more. Please see our support site for detailed information about content registration.
Member terms cover in detail the important work of depositing metadata.
Content Registration fees are different for different types of content and sometimes include volume discounts for large batches or backfile material.
Please see our FAQs for more information on Content Registration.
Additional help is provided in our extensive support pages, to assist you with the important work of registering content.
Linking research funding and published outcomes Funding data is used by funders to track the publications that result from their grants including use of facilities or equipment, salary awards, etc.). Publishers can contribute by depositing the funding acknowledgements from their publications as part of their standard metadata. The deposit should include funder names, funder IDs, and associated grant numbers. Funder names from acknowledgements should be matched with the corresponding unique funder ID from the Funder Registry, a curated list of over 13,000 international funding bodies.
Our members asked for the flexibility to register content at different points in the publishing lifecycle, so we extended our infrastructure to support members who want to register preprints. Our custom support for preprints ensures that links to these publications persist over time; that they are connected to the full history of the shared research results; and that the citation record is clear and up-to-date. Publishing preprints is about more than simply getting a DOI We have designed a schema together with a working group that included preprint advisors bioRxiv and arXiv, along with some members including PLOS, Elsevier, AIP, IOP, ACM.
Content can travel from place to place online, and it can also live in multiple locations. With Multiple Resolution, you can assign multiple URLs to a single metadata record. Members often use multiple resolution for co-hosted content or content in transition from one platform to another. Instead of resolving directly to a single page a multiple resolution-enabled link will instead land on an interim page. The interim page presents a list of link choices to the end user.
Our members asked for the flexibility to register content for the reviews and discussions of scholarly content which they publish, so we’ve extended our infrastructure to support members who post them. We support a whole host of outputs made publicly available from the peer review history, as they vary greatly based on journal. This may include referee reports, decision letter, and author response. The overall set may include outputs from the initial submission only or those from all subsequent rounds of revisions.
Launched in 2019, our registration service for grants allows funders and the wider research community to connect support with outputs and activities. Background Whilst the scholarly community has adopted standard persistent identifiers (PIDs)—for people (e.g. ORCID), content (e.g. DOIs, PMIDs), and now organizations (ROR) including funders (Open Funder Registry)—the record of the award was not captured in a consistent way across funders worldwide. These awards were not easily linked up with the literature or with researchers or with institutions.