The most mentioned neurointervention articles in online media: a bibliometric analysis of the top 101 articles with the highest altmetric attention scores

Evaluating Funding for Authors Achieving High Citations vs. Online Popularity

INTRODUCTION

The Altmetric score is a validated tool that measures online attention of scientific studies. A relationship between government/industry funding for authors and their study's citations have been previously demonstrated. It is not known whether funding is related to greater online attention. We hypothesize authors publishing studies achieving greater online attention (higher Altmetric scores) receive greater monetary support from industry while authors publishing studies achieving critical acclaim (more citations) receive greater monetary support from the National Institute of Health (NIH).

METHODS

Top spine surgery studies between 2010 and 2021 were selected based on Altmetric scores and citation number. The Open Payments Database was accessed to evaluate industry financial relationships while the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tool was accessed to evaluate NIH funding. Payments were compared between groups and analyzed with the Student t-test, analysis of variance, and chi square analysis. Alpha <0.05.

RESULTS

There were 60 and 51 authors with payment data in the top 50 Altmetric and top 50 citation studies, respectively, with eight authors having studies in both groups. Total industry payments between groups were not markedly different. The eight authors with studies in both groups received markedly more industry payments for consulting, travel/lodging, and faculty/speaking fees. Authors with articles in both groups (50%) were significantly more likely to receive NIH support, compared with authors of the top Altmetric articles (5%; P < 0.001) and top citation articles (12%; P < 0.001). Authors receiving NIH support received significantly less industry payments compared with authors not receiving NIH support ($148,544 versus $2,159,526; P < 0.001).

DISCUSSION

These findings reject our hypothesis: no notable differences for industry payments and NIH funding between authors for top Altmetric and citation studies. Authors receiving funding from industry versus the NIH are generally two distinct groups, but there is a small group supported by both. These studies achieve both critical acclaim (citations) and online popularity (Altmetric scores).

DATA AVAILABILITY

Data can be available on reasonable request.

The 100 most-cited and 100 most-mentioned COVID-19-related radiological articles: a comparative bibliometric analysis

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to identify the 100 most-cited and 100 most-mentioned coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19)-related radiological articles and compare their characteristics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched the Web of Science and Altmetric.com using the search terms "COVID," "COVID-19," "Coronavirus," "SARS-CoV-2," "nCoV," and "pandemic" to identify the most-cited and most-mentioned COVID-19-related articles. We identified the top 100 most-cited and 100 most-mentioned articles in the field of radiology, regardless of their publication journal. We extracted the information from the listed articles and compared the characteristics between the most-cited and most-mentioned.

RESULTS

Thirty (30%) articles were featured in the lists of the most-cited and most-mentioned articles. The comparison of the 100 most-cited and most-mentioned articles on each list showed that the most frequently cited articles were published in November 2020 and before (p < .001), originated from China (p < .001), covered the topic of diagnosis of COVID-19 (p < .001), and were related to the subspecialty of pulmonary imaging (p < .001); the most frequently mentioned articles were published in December 2020 and after (p < .001), originated from the USA (p < .001), covered the topic of diagnosis of sequelae of COVID-19 (p = .013) and post-vaccination complications (p < .001), and were related to the subspecialties of cardiac imaging (p < .001) and neuroradiology (p < .013).

CONCLUSION

Significant differences were observed in publication date, country of origin, topic, and subspecialty of scientific knowledge related to COVID-19 in the field of radiology, between citation and public dissemination.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

This bibliometric analysis compares the 100 most-cited and 100 most-mentioned COVID-19-related radiologic articles, aiming to provide valuable insights into the patterns of knowledge dissemination during the pandemic era.

KEY POINTS

• Thirty articles were featured on the lists of the 100 most-cited and 100 most-mentioned COVID-19-related articles. • The 70 unique most-cited articles more frequently originated from China (48.6%), while the unique most-mentioned articles more frequently originated from the USA (51.4%) (p < 0.001). • The 70 unique most-mentioned articles were more frequently related to cardiac imaging (25.7% vs.0%, p < 0.001) and neuroradiology (15.7% vs. 1.4%, p < 0.005) compared to the unique most-mentioned articles.

The Altmetric Attention Score Is Associated With Citation Rates and May Reflect Academic Impact in the Total Joint Arthroplasty Literature

Background: Given the increasing interest and potential use of social media for the promotion of orthopedic literature, there is a need to better understand Altmetrics. Purposes: We sought to determine the relationship between the Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) and the number of citations for articles on total joint arthroplasty (TJA) published in orthopedics journals. We also sought to determine the predictors of greater social media attention for these articles. Methods: Articles on TJA published in Bone and Joint Journal (BJJ), Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS), Clinical Orthopedics and Related Research (CORR), Journal of Arthroplasty, Journal of Knee Surgery, Hip International, and Acta Orthopaedica in 2016 were extracted (n = 498). One-way analysis of variance with Bonferroni corrections was used to compare AAS and citations across journals. Multivariate regressions were used to determine predictors of social media attention and number of citations. Results: The mean AAS and number of citations were 7.5 (range: 0-289) and 16.7 (range: 0-156), respectively. Significant between-group effects were observed according to journal for AAS and number of citations. Publishing an article in JBJS was the strongest predictor of higher number of citations. Publishing an article in BJJ was the only independent predictor of higher AAS, while publishing an article in JBJS or CORR trended toward statistical significance. A higher AAS was a significant predictor of a higher number of citations. Number of citations and number of study references were positive predictors of greater social media attention on Twitter and Facebook. Conclusions: In articles on TJA published in 7 journals in 2016, a higher AAS was a associated with a higher number of citations. Various bibliometric characteristics were found to be significantly associated with greater social media attention; the most common influences were number of citations and number of references. Researchers in orthopedics can use this information when considering how to assess the impact of their work.

Open Access Articles Garner Increased Social Media Attention and Citation Rates Compared With Subscription Access Research Articles: An Altmetrics-Based Analysis

BACKGROUND

To better understand the research impact on social media, alternative web-based metrics (Altmetrics) were developed. Open access (OA) publishing, which allows for widespread distribution of scientific content, has become increasingly common in the medical literature. However, the relationship between OA publishing and social media impact remains unclear.

PURPOSE

To compare social media attention and citation rates between OA and subscription access (SA) research articles within the orthopaedic and sports medicine literature.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

METHODS

Articles published as either OA or SA in 5 high-impact hybrid orthopaedic journals between January 2019 and December 2019 were analyzed. The primary outcome was the Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), a validated measure of social media attention. Secondary outcomes included citation rates, article characteristics, and the number of shares on social media. Independent t tests and chi-square analyses were used to compare outcomes between OA and SA articles. A multivariable linear regression analysis was performed to determine the association between article type and AAS while controlling for bibliometric characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 2143 articles (246 OA articles, 11.5%; 1897 SA articles, 88.5%) were included. The mean AAS among all OA articles was 62.4 ± 184.6 (range, 0-2032), whereas the mean AAS among all SA articles was 18.4 ± 109.8 (range, 0-3425), representing a statistically significant difference (P < .001). The mean citation rate among OA articles was significantly higher (17.0 ± 22.5; range, 0-139) than that of SA articles (8.6 ± 13.4; range, 0-169) (P < .001). Multivariable linear regression analysis demonstrated that OA status (β = 15.15; P = .044), number of institutions (β = 2.13; P = .023), studies classified as epidemiological investigations (β = 107.40; P < .001), and disclosure of a conflict of interest (β = -11.18; P = .032) were significantly associated with a higher AAS.

CONCLUSION

OA articles resulted in significantly greater AAS and citations in comparison with SA articles. Articles published through the OA option in hybrid journals as well as those with a higher number of institutions, those that disclosed a conflict of interest, and those classified as epidemiological investigations were positively associated with greater AAS in addition to a greater number of citations. The potential for more extensive research dissemination inherent in the OA option may therefore translate into greater reach and social media attention.

The Author Impact Factor as a Metric to Evaluate the Impact of Neurosurgical Researchers

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the Author Impact Factor (AIF) as a useful metric and as a complement to the h-index among neurosurgical researchers.

METHODS

The 5-year AIF and h-index were compared among 3 groups of researchers: 1) the 100 most prolific of all time within general neurosurgical journals ("Experienced"), 2) the 100 most prolific during the 2015-2019 period within general neurosurgical journals ("Trending Group"), and 3) the 100 postgraduation year 7 neurosurgical residents with the highest h-index ("Amateur").

RESULTS

The Amateur group had a lower median h-index than the Experienced (6 vs. 55; P < 0.001) and Trending (6 vs. 43; P < 0.001) groups. The highest h-index of the Amateur group (24) was lower than the first quartile of the Experienced (46.25) and Trending (26.00) groups. The Amateur group had a lower median 5-year AIF than the Experienced (2.15 vs. 3.17; P < 0.001) and Trending (2.15 vs. 2.85; P = 0.02) groups. Unlike the h-index, the gap between the 5-year AIF distribution of the Amateur group and other groups was not profound. Although there was a positive correlation between the metrics in the 3 groups, they did not proxy for each other. For instance, while the h-index of some experienced authors that have not published recently was high, their AIFs were zero. Also, some Amateur authors published very impactful articles and had a high 5-year AIF. However, since their number of publications is inevitably low, their h-index were low.

CONCLUSIONS

The AIF provides intuitive and complementary information to the h-index regarding the research output of neurosurgical authors.

Technique Articles Are More Effective at Increasing Social Media Attention in Comparison With Original Research Articles: An Altmetrics-Based Analysis

Purpose

To compare social media attention and citation rates between technique articles and matched original research articles (ORAs) regarding surgical procedures.

Methods

All technique articles published from August 2019 through July 2020 in the free, electronic versions of Arthroscopy Techniques and JBJS Essential Surgical Techniques were matched by topic to articles in the “Original Research” sections of Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation and JBJS Open Access in a 4:1 ratio within this time frame. The primary outcome was the Altmetric Attention Score (AAS). Secondary outcomes included citations, bibliometrics, and social media metrics. Independent t tests were used to compare primary and secondary outcomes between technique articles and ORAs. A multivariate linear regression analysis was performed to determine the association between article type and social media attention while controlling for confounding bibliometric characteristics.

Results

A total of 285 matched research articles (n = 57, 20.0%) and technique articles (n = 228, 80.0%) were included. The mean AAS among all technique articles was 3.63 ± 10.08 (range, 0-96) whereas the mean AAS among all ORAs was 1.30 ± 3.98 (range, 0-25), representing a statistically significant difference (P = .016). The mean citation rate among all technique articles was not significantly different from that among ORAs (P = .73). Multivariate linear regression analysis showed a statistically significant positive association between AAS and article type, with an additional mean increase in the AAS of 2.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.04-5.77; P = .047) for every technique article compared with an ORA. Furthermore, a significant positive relation was noted between the article origin and the AAS, with an increase in the AAS of 3.00 (95% confidence interval, 0.82-5.17; P = .007) for every article published in North America compared with an article originating from another continent.

Conclusions

Technique articles resulted in significantly greater AASs and social media attention in comparison with open-access ORAs on similar topics. Publications that described technical procedures in a technique journal and studies from North America were positively associated with greater AASs and greater numbers of citations received by articles.

Clinical Relevance

An improved understanding of how much attention is given to technique articles versus matched ORAs by social media may influence the methods authors and journals use for distributing content. The present study suggests that one option to increase the amount of social media attention received for a particular study may be to utilize an accompanying surgical technique video or illustrations as these are easily shareable on social media and offer rapid dissemination of knowledge, similar to that of an infographic. However, physicians who view multimedia within technique articles should be encouraged to review the accompanying articles and the supporting original research as a primary source before making changes in their clinical practice.

The 100 Most Mentioned Glaucoma Articles Online With Highest Altmetric Attention Scores

PRCIS

Characteristics of the most mentioned glaucoma articles on the internet were analyzed, allowing a better understanding of the dissemination of glaucoma research to the general public.

PURPOSE

The aim was to determine the 100 most mentioned articles on the internet in the field of glaucoma and analyze their characteristics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified the top 100 glaucoma articles with the highest Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), an automatically calculated metric for monitoring social media. Each article was evaluated for several characteristics including year of publication, title, journal name, journal impact factor (IF), article topic, article type, affiliation, and online mentions (news, blog, policy, Twitter, Facebook, etc.). Correlation analysis was conducted for AAS with these characteristics.

RESULTS

The selected 100 articles came from 44 journals with more than half (56%) published in ophthalmology-specific journals. There was no significant correlation between IF and number of articles in a specific journal or AAS (P>0.1), but the number of articles in the top 100 was higher for ophthalmology journals with a higher IF (P<0.05). Original study was the most common study type (87%), of which clinical observation study was the most common subgroup (40%). Epidemiology/risk factor and basic science were the most common article topics (each 24%), followed by medical treatment (13%). Article topics regarding medical treatment had a significantly greater AAS than other topics (P<0.05). Of the top 5 articles, more than half (60%) were related to "Lifestyle choice" topics.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no association between journal IF and AAS, consistent with previous studies. 90% of journals that had articles in the top 100 had a Twitter page. "Lifestyle choice" activities and other modifiable risk factors attracted significant online attention regarding glaucoma studies, with two of the top three most mentioned articles related to dietary intake. The present study thus provides a better understanding of online engagement with glaucoma research and the dissemination of this research to the general public.

The dissemination of brain imaging guidelines and recommendations

Many neuroimaging guidelines and recommendations have been published in the literature to guide fellow researchers to conduct and report research findings in a standardized manner. It was largely unknown if they were cited or read by the scientific community. Analyses were conducted to assess their impact in terms of citations, Twitter posts, and Mendeley reads. Web of Science Core Collection database was accessed to identify relevant publications. The number of their Twitter posts and Mendeley reads were recorded from Altmetric and Mendeley databases respectively. Spearman correlation tests were conducted to evaluate if the citation count had a relationship with these metrics. When all 1786 publications were considered, citation count had a strong positive correlation with Mendeley reads (rho = 0.602, p < 0.001), but a weak negative correlation with Twitter posts (rho = −0.085, p < 0.001). When publications in the 2010 s were specifically considered, citation count had an even stronger positive correlation with Mendeley reads (rho = 0.712, P < 0.001), whereas the correlation with Twitter posts became positive but still weak (rho = 0.072, P = 0.012). Temporal profiles of citation and Mendeley counts showed that these guidelines and recommendations had a relatively stable influence in the field for years after being published.

•

1786 publications providing neuroimaging guidelines and recommendations were analyzed.

•

Citation count had a strong positive correlation with Mendeley reads.

•

Citation count had a weak negative correlation with Twitter posts.

•

It had a weak positive correlation with Twitter posts for publications in the 2010s.

•

Temporal profiles of citation and Mendeley counts showed their stable influence.

Infographics Are More Effective at Increasing Social Media Attention in Comparison With Original Research Articles: An Altmetrics-Based Analysis

PURPOSE

To compare social media attention and citation rates between infographics (visual abstracts) and original research articles.

METHODS

All infographics in 2019 from electronic versions of Arthroscopy were matched by topic to articles in the "Original Research" section of the journal in a 4:1 ratio within the same year. The primary outcome was the Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), a cumulative measure of social media attention from various platforms such as Twitter and Facebook. Secondary outcomes included citation rates, article characteristics, and number of shares on social media platforms. Independent t tests and χ² analyses were used to compare primary and secondary outcomes between infographics and control articles. Multivariate linear regression analysis was performed to determine the association between article type and social media attention while controlling for bibliometric characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 60 matched research articles (n = 48, 80.0%) and infographics (n = 12, 20.0%) published in 2019 in Arthroscopy were included. The mean AAS among all infographics was 29.75 ± 32.84 (range, 3-118), whereas the mean AAS among all control research articles was 5.75 ± 8.90 (range, 0-41), representing a statistically significant difference (P < .001). Infographics had significantly more Twitter mentions (100% vs 70.8%, P < .001) and Facebook mentions (75% vs. 6.2%, P < .001) compared with original articles. Multivariate linear regression analysis demonstrated a statistically significant and positive association between AAS and article type, with an additional mean increase in the AAS of 33.7 (95% confidence interval 11.6-50.6; P = .003) for every infographic article compared with an original research article. The mean citation rate among all infographics was 2.4 ± 2.4 (range, 0-7), whereas the mean citation rate among all control research articles was 2.2 ± 4.0 (range, 0-27), which was not a significant difference (P = .69).

CONCLUSIONS

Infographics resulted in significantly greater AAS and social media attention in comparison with original research articles of similar topics. We recommend the routine creation of infographics by journals to increase the social media attention that their research and chosen topics of interest receive. However, viewers of infographics should read them out of interest but turn their attention toward the original article or a source of more detailed information before making changes in clinical decision-making or practice, as they can be oversimplified.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Infographics are an increasingly used by journals as a form of depicting research findings from select studies. By producing infographics, journals may increase the amount of social media attention received for a particular study or topic of interest.

The Most Widely Disseminated COVID-19-Related Scientific Publications in Online Media: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Top 100 Articles with the Highest Altmetric Attention Scores

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic. This study's aim was to identify and characterize the top 100 COVID-19-related scientific publications, which had received the highest Altmetric Attention Scores (AASs). Hence, we searched Altmetric Explorer using search terms such as "COVID" or "COVID-19" or "Coronavirus" or "SARS-CoV-2" or "nCoV" and then selected the top 100 articles with the highest AASs. For each article identified, we extracted the following information: the overall AAS, publishing journal, journal impact factor (IF), date of publication, language, country of origin, document type, main topic, and accessibility. The top 100 articles most frequently were published in journals with high (>10.0) IF (n = 67), were published between March and July 2020 (n = 67), were written in English (n = 100), originated in the United States (n = 45), were original articles (n = 59), dealt with treatment and clinical manifestations (n = 33), and had open access (n = 98). Our study provides important information pertaining to the dissemination of scientific knowledge about COVID-19 in online media.

The Most Influential Publications on Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Bibliometric Analysis

Background/Aims: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the first-line treatment for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms with negligible lymph node metastasis. It has evolved through improvements in expertise and equipment, increased understanding of indications and short- and long-term outcomes, and better management of complications. This study aimed to assess and characterize the most influential publications in ESD research.Materials and Methods: We searched the top 50 most cited articles using Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) and Google Scholar (GS) from the inception of these services to January 2019. The top 50 Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) articles based on online media mentions were also searched. Each article was evaluated for the number of citations, title, journal, and publication year.Results: The number of citations for the top 50 WoSCC articles on ESD ranged from 37 to 199; Endoscopy published the most articles (20%). Among the top 50 GS articles, Gastrointestinal Endoscopy published the most ESD articles (34%) and the most shared AAS articles (42.6%). PubMed Central article citations in WoSCC or GS showed significant correlation with those from each metric, unlike AAS. The words with the highest relevance scores were “submucosal tunnel dissection,” “guideline,” “novel submucosal gel,” “adhesive material,” “cell sheet,” “esophageal ulcer,” “hemospray,” and “endoscopic closure,” while the following words were influential: “meta-analysis,” “esophageal stricture,” “perforation,” “bleeding,” “fibrin glue,” “artificial ulcer,” “porcine model” and “esophageal squamous cell neoplasia,” excluding “ESD.”Conclusions: This study presents a detailed list of influential articles, journals, and topic words.

Altmetrics Attention Scores for Randomized Controlled Trials in Total Joint Arthroplasty Are Reflective of High Scientific Quality: An Altmetrics-Based Methodological Quality and Bias Analysis

The Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) has been associated with citation rates across medical and surgical disciplines. However, factors that drive high AAS remain poorly understood and there remains multiple pitfalls to correlating these metrics alone with the quality of a study. The purpose of the current study was to determine the relationship between methodologic and study biases and the AAS in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in total joint arthroplasty journals.

Altmetrics in Plastic Surgery Journals: Does It Correlate With Citation Count?

BACKGROUND

Altmetrics (alternative metrics) have become one of the most commonly utilized metrics to track the impact of research articles across electronic and social media platforms.

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to identify whether the Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) is a good proxy for citation counts and whether it can be employed as an accurate measure to complement the current gold standard.

METHODS

The authors conducted a citation analysis of all articles published in 6 plastic surgery journals during the 2016 calendar year. Citation counts and AAS were abstracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 1420 articles were identified. The mean AAS was 11 and the median AAS was 1. The journal with the highest mean AAS was Aesthetic Surgery Journal (31), followed by Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (19). A weak positive correlation was identified (r = 0.33, P < .0001) between AAS and citations. Articles in the top 1% in terms of citation counts showed strong positive correlation between AAS and citation counts (r = 0.64, P = .01). On the contrary, articles in the top 1% of AAS had no significant correlation with citation counts (r = -0.31, P = .29).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall correlation between citations and AAS was weak, and therefor AAS may not be an accurate early predictor of future citations. The 2 metrics seem to measure different aspects of the impact of scholarly work and should be utilized in tandem for determining the reach of a scientific article.

The online attention to orthodontic research: an Altmetric analysis of the orthodontic journals indexed in the journal citation reports from 2014 to 2018

Background

To describe the impact of research, beyond the limits of the academic environment, Altmetric, a new social and traditional media metric was proposed. The aims of this study were to analyze the online activity related to orthodontic research via Altmetric and to assess if a correlation exists among citations, Mendeley reader count, and the AAS (Altmetric Attention Score).

Method

The Dimensions App was searched for articles published in the orthodontic journals listed in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) throughout the years 2014 to 2018. The articles with a positive AAS were collected and screened for data related to publication and authorship. The articles with an AAS higher than 5 were screened for research topic and study design. Citation counts were harvested from Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus.

Results

The best performing journals were Progress in Orthodontics and the European Journal of Orthodontics with a mean AAS per published item of 1.455 and 1.351, respectively and the most prevalent sources were Tweets and Facebook mentions. The most prevalent topic was Oral Health-Related Quality of Life (OHRQOL) and the study design was systematic reviews. The correlation between the AAS and the citations in both WOS and Scopus was poor (r = 0.1463 and r = 0.1508, p < .05). The correlation between citations count and Mendeley reader (r = 0.6879 and r = 0.697, p < .05) was moderate.

Conclusions

Few journals displayed a high level of web activity. Journals and editors should enhance online dissemination of the scientific outputs. The authors should report the impact of the findings to the general public in a convenient way to facilitate online dissemination but to avoid an opportunistic use of the research outputs. Despite the lack of correlation, a combination of the citation count and the AAS can give a more comprehensive assessment of research impact.

What is trending in paediatric dentistry? An Altmetric study on paediatric dentistry journals

PURPOSE

To assess the online attention to research in the field of paediatric dentistry in relation to publication details and citations.

METHODS

The articles were identified by a search performed through the Dimensions Free App. The search included the six journals related to paediatric dentistry listed in the SCImago Journal and Country Rank. The 200 articles with the highest AAS (Altmetric Attention Score) were collected and screened for data related to publication, authorship, and research topic. Citations were harvested from WOS (Web of Science) and Scopus.

RESULTS

The 86.3% of the 200 articles belonged to only two of the journals: the International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry and the European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry. The 53.5% of the articles were published between 2014 and 2019. The mean AAS was 8.3. Cross-sectional studies were the most prevalent study design. AAS did not correlate to the number of citations as reported in WOS and Scopus.

CONCLUSIONS

Online attention to research in paediatric dentistry can be improved. According to the topic, erosion studies displayed high visibility. The classic citation count in combination with the AAS offers a more comprehensive insight iinto research. The online profile of journals and their social media dissemination policies should be improved to facilitate the spread of research information in scholar and non-scholar audiences through the web.

A Bibliometric Analysis Using Alternative Metrics for Articles in the Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the articles in the Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine (ARM) using a bibliometric analysis to verify whether there is a correlation between the topics of interest for expert groups and the public media.

METHODS

A total of 1,088 ARM articles from the third issue of 2011 to the third issue of 2019 were analyzed. We conducted a bibliometric analysis of the articles using conventional metrics (CM) and alternative metrics (AM). The CM was investigated by collating the type of publication, number of citations, and the specific field of rehabilitation medicine for each article. The AM was analyzed using the Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) provided by Altmetric, the leading AM company. The correlation between the number of citations and the AAS was tested using the Spearman rank correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

The combined ratio of original articles and case reports was over 90% in this study; however, the total distribution was significantly different compared to previous bibliometric studies (p<0.05). There were 233 articles that satisfied both conditions of at least one citation and at least one AAS point. The number of citations and the AAS were found to have a statistically significant positive linear correlation on a scatter plot (r=0.216, p=0.001).

CONCLUSION

There is a significant correlation between AM and CM, which means itis important to increase the dissemination of academic knowledge through the public media and increase the status of the journal by increasing the citation-related index.

What Is the Predictive Ability and Academic Impact of the Altmetrics Score and Social Media Attention?

BACKGROUND

Citation rate and journal impact factor have traditionally been used to assess research impact; however, these may fail to represent impact beyond the sphere of academics. Given that social media is now used to disseminate research, alternative web-based metrics (altmetrics) were recently developed to better understand research impact on social media. However, the relationship between altmetrics and traditional bibliometrics in orthopaedic literature is poorly understood.

PURPOSE

To (1) assess the extent that altmetrics correlate with traditional bibliometrics and (2) identify publication characteristics that predict greater altmetrics scores.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

METHODS

Articles published in The American Journal of Sports Medicine (AJSM), The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, Acta Orthopaedica, and Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy between January 2016 and December 2016 were analyzed. Among the extracted publication characteristics were journal, number of authors, geographic region of origin, highest degree of first author, study subject and design, sample size, conflicts of interest, and level of evidence; number of references, institutions, citations, tweets, Facebook mentions, and news mentions; and Altmetric Attention Score (AAS). Multivariate regressions were used to determine (1) publication characteristics predictive of AAS and social media attention (mentions on Twitter, Facebook, and the news) and (2) the relationship between AAS and citation rate.

RESULTS

A total of 496 published articles were included, with a mean AAS of 8.6 (SD, 31.7; range, 0-501) and a mean citation rate of 15.0 (SD, 16.1; range, 0-178). Articles in AJSM (β = 19.9; P < .001), publications from North America (β = 8.5; P = .033), and studies concerning measure validation/reliability (β = 25.5; P = .004) were independently associated with higher AAS. Greater AAS score significantly predicted a greater citation rate (β = 0.16; P < .0001). The citation rate was an independent predictor of greater social media attention on Twitter, Facebook, and the news (odds ratio range, 1.02-1.03; P < .05 all).

CONCLUSION

AAS had a significant positive association with citation rates of articles in 5 high-impact orthopaedic journals. Articles in AJSM, studies concerning measure validation and reliability, and publications from North America were positively associated with greater AAS. A greater number of citations was consistently associated with publication attention received on social media platforms.

Analysis of the altmetric top 100 articles with the highest altmetric attention scores in medical imaging journals

PURPOSE

Alternative metrics (altmetrics) provides a complementary measure of the impact of scientific articles. The aim of this study was to identify and characterize the top 100 articles with the highest Altmetric attention score (AAS) in medical imaging journals.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched for AASs articles published in 116 journals in the subject category "Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging" using the Web of Science. We determined the top 100 articles with the highest AAS using the Altmetric.com database, and then analyzed them with regard to the publishing journal, year, country of origin, type of article, subspecialty, main topic, and imaging technique.

RESULTS

The top 100 articles were published in 18 imaging journals, led by Radiology (47%). These articles were published from 2016 to 2018 (94%). Most of the articles were from the United States (62%) and were original clinical studies (59%). The most common subspecialties and imaging technique of study were neuroimaging (30%) and MRI (35%). The main topics of articles were brain disease and function (30%).

CONCLUSION

Our study presents a detailed list and analysis of the top 100 articles with the highest AAS in imaging literature, which provides unique characteristics representing the public's attention in this field.

Measuring the social impact of research in Paediatric Dentistry: An Altmetric study

BACKGROUND

Traditional metrics have been extensively used to evaluate the scientific performance. Despite being widespread accepted, citation-based metrics are not able to describe the social impact of research. A diverse metric, Altmetric, was proposed to overcome those limitations.

AIM

This study aims to analyse the social impact of research in the field of paediatric dentistry and to assess if a correlation exists between the JCR citations, the AAS score, and the recently released Dimensions citation count.

DESIGN

A bibliometric study was conducted on the four journals related to Paediatric Dentistry listed in the JCR from 2014 to 2017. Descriptive statistics was used to describe the articles and the journals. Pearson's correlation analysis was used to explore the relationship among JCR citations, AAS, and Dimensions.

RESULTS

The percentage of articles with an AAS presents a huge variability and was significantly higher in the International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry. In our sample, the correlation between the JCR citation count and the AAS was poor in the years 2014, 2015, and 2016 and low in 2017. The correlation between JCR citation and Dimensions citation count was strong.

CONCLUSIONS

The social impact of research in paediatric dentistry can be increased. Dimensions could be an alternative to the JCR. Both the editors and the researcher should change their vision and facilitate the access to research information to scholar and non-scholar audiences.

Altmetrics Analysis of Archivos de Bronconeumología From 2014 to 2018

INTRODUCTION

Alternative metrics or altmetrics are non-traditional measurements of scientific production that reflect a publication's influence in social networks and similar channels of dissemination. The aim of this study was to analyze the media impact of Archivos de Bronconeumología according to 2 altmetric aggregators and website visits.

METHODS

This was an observational study of the original articles and review and consensus articles published in Archivos de Bronconeumología during the period 2014-2018. Data from the PlumX Metrics and Altmetric aggregators and visits to the Archivos de Bronconeumología website were analyzed. Five comparisons were made: by specialty area, by funding received, by number of participating centers, by document type, and by topic. In a subanalysis, altmetrics were correlated with the conventional citation system.

RESULTS

We analyzed 273 papers, of which 186 were original articles (68.1%). The papers that achieved greater media impact in the 2 aggregators analyzed, and in terms of website visits, were pulmonology papers and review and consensus articles. The mean Altmetric Attention Score was 1.9±4.4 (range 0-59), which is above average for the date of publication of the paper. A statistically significant weak to moderate correlation was identified between altmetrics and conventional citations.

CONCLUSIONS

Review articles, consensus documents, and pulmonology papers had a greater media impact. Mean Altmetric Attention Score was higher than the average based on the date of publication. A weak to moderate correlation between altmetrics and conventional citations was identified.