Abstract
PurposeTo provide an overview of altmetrics, including their potential benefits and limitations, how they may be obtained, and their role in assessing pharmacoepidemiologic research impact.MethodsOur review was informed by compiling relevant literature identified through searching multiple health research databases (PubMed, Embase, and CIHNAHL) and grey literature sources (websites, blogs, and reports). We demonstrate how pharmacoepidemiologists, in particular, may use altmetrics to understand scholarly impact and knowledge translation by providing a case study of a drug‐safety study conducted by the Canadian Network of Observational Drug Effect Studies.ResultsA common approach to measuring research impact is the use of citation‐based metrics, such as an article's citation count or a journal's impact factor. “Alternative” metrics, or altmetrics, are increasingly supported as a complementary measure of research uptake in the age of social media. Altmetrics are nontraditional indicators that capture a diverse set of traceable, online research‐related artifacts including peer‐reviewed publications and other research outputs (software, datasets, blogs, videos, posters, policy documents, presentations, social media posts, wiki entries, etc).ConclusionCompared with traditional citation‐based metrics, altmetrics take a more holistic view of research impact, attempting to capture the activity and engagement of both scholarly and nonscholarly communities. Despite the limited theoretical underpinnings, possible commercial influence, potential for gaming and manipulation, and numerous data quality‐related issues, altmetrics are promising as a supplement to more traditional citation‐based metrics because they can ingest and process a larger set of data points related to the flow and reach of scholarly communication from an expanded pool of stakeholders. Unlike citation‐based metrics, altmetrics are not inherently rooted in the research publication process, which includes peer review; it is unclear to what extent they should be used for research evaluation.
Highlights
MethodsOur review was informed by compiling relevant literature identified through searching multiple health research databases (PubMed, Embase, and CIHNAHL) and grey literature sources (websites, blogs, and reports)
Findings from pharmacoepidemiology studies are often relevant to a broad audience including scientists, healthcare professionals, policy makers, industry, and the public
Citation‐ based author level; article level; and journal level bibliometrics have served as the mainstay of measuring scholarly impact for decades, altmetrics are increasingly becoming recognized as a complementary measure of research impact in the age of the social web.[3,4,5,6,7,8]
Summary
Our review was informed by compiling relevant literature identified through searching multiple health research databases (PubMed, Embase, and CIHNAHL) and grey literature sources (websites, blogs, and reports). In particular, may use altmetrics to understand scholarly impact and knowledge translation by providing a case study of a drug‐safety study conducted by the Canadian Network of Observational Drug Effect Studies
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
