Compare methods

	Bibliographic Record Quality Analysis	Metadata Quality Assessment
Field	Library Information Science	Library Information Science
Family	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Year of origin	2018	2004
Originator	Philip Hider; Elaine Svenonius	Thomas Bruce & Diane Hillmann; Jung-ran Park & Yuji Tosaka
Type	Evaluation pipeline for bibliographic record quality	Measurement pipeline for metadata quality
Seminal source	Hider, P. (2018). Information Resource Description: Creating and Managing Metadata (2nd ed.). London: Facet Publishing. ISBN: 9781783302239	Bruce, T. R., & Hillmann, D. I. (2004). The Continuum of Metadata Quality: Defining, Expressing, Exploiting. In D. I. Hillmann & E. L. Westbrooks (Eds.), Metadata in Practice (pp. 238-256). Chicago: ALA.
Aliases	Catalogue Record Quality Analysis, MARC Record Quality Assessment, Bibliographic Data Quality Evaluation, Cataloguing Quality Analysis	Metadata Quality Evaluation, Metadata Quality Measurement, Metadata Assessment, Digital Repository Metadata Evaluation
Related	3	3
Summary	Bibliographic record quality analysis evaluates the catalogue records that describe library resources — typically MARC or linked-data records built to standards such as RDA — to determine how well they serve their purpose. Philip Hider's account of information resource description frames quality in terms of accuracy, completeness, consistency, and conformance to cataloguing rules, while Elaine Svenonius's objectives of the catalogue — to find, identify, select, and obtain resources — supply the functional yardstick against which records are ultimately judged. The analysis samples records, scores them on each quality criterion, checks their encoding and content against the relevant standard, and asks whether they actually let users carry out the catalogue's core tasks. The result is evidence about where cataloguing is strong, where it fails, and what remediation or policy change is needed.	Metadata quality assessment is the systematic measurement of how good a collection's descriptive metadata is for its intended purposes. Thomas Bruce and Diane Hillmann's influential framework defined quality along a continuum of dimensions — completeness, accuracy, conformance to expectations, logical consistency and coherence, timeliness, accessibility, and provenance — and argued that quality must be defined relative to use, then expressed and exploited. Jung-ran Park and Yuji Tosaka surveyed how digital repositories operationalize the three most widely accepted criteria — accuracy, completeness, and consistency — into concrete control mechanisms. Assessment turns these dimensions into measurable indicators, scores records and collections against them, and produces diagnostics that pinpoint where metadata falls short, so that interoperability, discovery, and trust can be improved.