Altmetric Attention Score Research Articles

What is the effect of posting video abstracts on journal article impact?

This study assessed the impact of posting video abstracts on journal articles and authors' X engagement. European Journal of Sport Science articles were disseminated on X as animated video abstracts (AN), author-provided video abstracts (AU), or title-only (TO) posts. Metrics, including page views, Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), X engagements, impressions, link clicks, media engagements, and views, were compared at 7 and 30 days. Authors' X presence and video abstract creation were also examined. Page views did not differ between groups after 7 or 30 days. After 7 days, AN received significantly more AAS, impressions, media views and media engagements than AU or TO. After 30 days, AN received significantly more AAS, impressions, engagements, media views and media engagements than AU or TO. TO received significantly more link clicks than AU or TO after 7 and 30 days. Fifty percent of authors have an X account and 11.2% indicated interest in creating a video abstract. Articles promoted using animated video abstracts received more attention, reach and impact on X than those promoted using author-provided video abstracts or title-only posts. Animated video abstracts can be used by authors to effectively promote their research findings and increase their visibility on social media.

Abstract 4136398: Gender Disparities Absent in Citation Metrics and Online Attention Across Thoracic Surgery Publications

Introduction: A recent study by Women As One highlighted the prevalence of “MANuscripts” (publications authored solely by men) and their potential impact on equity in academic promotions within cardiology. The study revealed notable differences in citation rates and online attention between publications in cardiology journals led by male and female authors. To further explore these disparities, we examined publications in prominent thoracic surgery journals. Hypothesis: Thoracic surgery publications where women hold key authorship roles (primary and senior) receive lower citations and online attention compared to those with men as leading authors. Methods: We analyzed data from peer-reviewed publications in 2019 from two high-impact thoracic surgery journals: The Annals of Thoracic Surgery and The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. Citation metrics and Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS) were sourced from Google Scholar paired with the Altmetric Google Chrome extension. Citation rates, AAS, and names of primary and senior authors were manually collected between September 22, 2023 and December 21, 2023. The genders of key authors were determined using Genderize, a gender-determination software, supplemented by manual searches for authors not detected by the software. A minimal number of publications were excluded if either their AAS or citation metrics were unavailable. Significant differences in the data were analyzed using one-sided Mann-Whitney U-tests. Results: Of the 1,482 authors included in the analysis, 18.4% were females in primary or senior roles. Our analysis found no significant differences in citation rates or AAS between male and female primary authors (p=0.09 and p=0.31, respectively), or between male and female senior authors (p=0.48 and p=0.38, respectively). Furthermore, after combining the data of male primary and senior authors and comparing it to the combined data of female primary and senior authors, no significant discrepancies were found for both citations (p=0.13) and AAS (p=0.28). Conclusion: Contrary to analyses of cardiology journals, our data from thoracic surgery articles does not indicate a gender disparity between male and female authors in terms of citations and online attention. While this does not definitively rule out the presence of inequity in thoracic surgery research, it suggests that male-authored manuscripts may not be a primary source of gender disparity in this field.

How far do oral lectures at European Orthodontic Society congresses reach? A comparison of abstract publication rates, article citations, and social media mentions.

This study investigated the scientific impact of oral abstracts presented in five consecutive European Orthodontic Society (EOS) congresses in terms of full-text publication rates as well as citations and social media metrics (altmetrics) of the resulting articles. PubMed (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed) and Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.nl/) were screened to identify published articles originally presented as lectures at EOS 2015-2019. EOS date, abstract title, subject, number of authors, authors' names, first author's country of origin, and type of affiliation were extracted from congress abstract books. Altmetric Attention Scores (AASs), number of X (formerly Twitter) posts, Mendeley reads, and citations of the articles were retrieved from Altmetric Explorer and Web of Science (WoS) databases, respectively. Abstract details, full publication rates and Altmetric mentions and WoS citations of the related articles were analysed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression. In total, 51.79 to 73.91% of the lectures presented at EOS 2015-2019 were converted into peer-reviewed articles. There was a median interval of 10.95 months (interquartile range 20.5 months) between conference and publication dates. EOS congress year (overall Wald test P-value = .04) and number of authors (overall Wald test P-value < .01) were significant predictors for full-text publication of oral lectures. There was no significant effect of EOS presentation on AASs, citations, X posts, and Mendeley readers (P > .05). Journal impact factors and quartile rankings were not considered to determine the impact of the journals that published articles originally presented as EOS oral abstracts. Overall, 61.30% of EOS 2015-2019 lectures were published as full-length articles. Multi-authored abstracts presented higher odds of publication, whereas oral abstracts presented at EOS 2015 and 2018 had the lowest probabilities to reach full publication. EOS abstract-based articles were assigned similar numbers of citations and AASs to articles not presented at EOS congresses.

What Are the Most Popular Articles in Urogynecology and Who Is Disseminating Them

Importance This research describes which articles published in Urogynecology are garnering the most attention online. Understanding which articles are having the largest impact in the online community has become increasingly important due to the exponential increase in the use of social media on the internet. Objective The Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) is a quantitative and qualitative measure of the articles’ online attention in social media and news outlets, blogs, and reference managers. The aim of this study was to provide an analysis of those accessing and sharing the 100 most popular articles published in Urogynecology. Study Design This was a retrospective descriptive analysis. Using Dimensions, a “linked research knowledge system,” data about each article’s demographics on Twitter and other media sources was extracted from each of the articles within Urogynecology with the highest AAS. No articles were excluded. The articles were categorized by topic and metrics of online sharing were compared among categories. Results Fifteen categories were created. Sexual health and education articles had the highest average Altmetric scores per article and reached the highest impressions per article and had the highest average follower count per Twitter user. On average, social justice in medicine had the highest number of tweets per article. Tweets were most often composed by members of the public (58%) compared with health care practitioners (14%), researchers (13%), and science communicators (12%). Conclusions Sexual health and education articles had the highest average AAS and impressions on Twitter. We observed a difference in which articles are being shared most among the general public and health care professionals. The general public comprised a majority of those sharing articles online regardless of category. Additionally, there may be a disparity in research, its funding, and online scientific communications within the field of urogynecology.

Are open science practices in dentistry associated with higher Altmetric scores and citation rates?

AimOpen science, a set of principles and practices, aims to make scientific research more accessible and accountable, benefiting scientists and society. This study evaluated whether adopting open science practices (OSPs) correlates with higher citation rates and Altmetric scores. MethodsA random sample of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) on dental caries published between 2000 and 2022 was selected. A systematic PubMed search identified relevant RCTs, and data on OSPs - study registration, open methodology, open software, open scripts, open analysis plan, open data, open peer review, and open access (OA) - were manually collected by two independent assessors. The Robot Reviewer tool automatically evaluated the risk of bias (RoB). Outcomes included the total number of citations and the Altmetric Attention Score. Associations between OSPs, RoB, and other explanatory variables with the outcomes were assessed using binomial negative regression analysis, and expressed as Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR; α =0.05). ResultsIn total, 323 papers were analysed. At least one OSP was adopted in 57.5 % (n = 186) of the articles, dropping to 39.6 % (n = 128) without OA. Papers with protocol registration (IRR: 1.45; 95 % CI: 1.15, 1.82) and OA publication (IRR: 1.24; 95 % CI: 1.01, 1.53) had higher citation rates. Conversely, papers in full OA journals had fewer citations (IRR: 0.67; 95 % CI: 0.52, 0.87). After adjusting for RoB, low-risk studies showed higher citation rates (IRR: 1.48; 95 % CI: 1.14, 1.91), while OA lost significance. For Altmetric scores, registered and OA manuscripts showed higher scores (IRR: 3.74; 95 % CI: 2.00, 7.01; IRR: 1.69; 95 % CI: 1.04, 2.75), with registration remaining significant after adjusting for RoB and impact factor (IRR: 3.71; 95 % CI: 1.97–6.99). ConclusionThe adoption of OSPs demonstrated a partial correlation with citation rates and Altmetric scores in RCTs on dental caries; however, these effects are complex and seem more related to the journal's impact factor. Clinical significanceThe citations and the attention to clinical trials in dentistry, which could drive clinical decision-making and the elaboration of policies and recommendations, seem to be driven more by the journal's prestige than by the adoption of OSPs.

Analyzing hockey publications through scientometric and altmetric perspectives

Purpose This study aims to present scientometric mapping and altmetric analysis of publications related to “Hockey” in the past three decades. By using the advanced analytical techniques of mapping coupled with altmetric analysis, this paper aims to reveal the complex network of collaborations, the dispersion of expertise worldwide and prevailing thematic trends in the field of hockey. Design/methodology/approach The data was extracted from the Web of Science (WoS) database and Altmetric Explorer for articles related to hockey over the past three decades. VOSviewer was used to conduct network analysis whereas MS-Excel was used for altmetric data analysis. The study focused on the articles retrieved using the key term “Hockey” in English language publications. The altmetric attention scores (AAS) were used to measure the level of online attention on different platforms, complementing traditional bibliometric analysis. Findings The study reveals a notable increase in the productivity of hockey research over the past 30 years, with a specific focus on major surges in publication output and altmetric attention in recent times. Coauthorship and country-wise mapping analysis highlight global research collaboration trends, while keyword analysis underscores thematic concentrations. Key journals such as British Journal of Sports Medicine and American Journal of Sports Medicine emerge as crucial dissemination platforms. The importance of X posts (Formerly Twitter) and Mendeley in the diffusion of hockey literature is highlighted by altmetric research. Originality/value The study provides a concise overview of research conducted on the game of hockey. This research will be advantageous for researchers and individuals involved in the hockey community, as it offers bibliographic insights and aids in identifying suitable media for disseminating their findings.

Research Study Characteristics Associated with Media Engagement in Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Database Studies

Objectives: This study identified associations between a study’s Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) and the number of times it was posted on X (formerly Twitter) with article characteristics such as the topic or publishing journal. Design: Retrospective study. Setting: Articles published in the orthopedic literature. Article Selection: A total of 116 eligible articles using administrative databases or clinical registries published in 2020 in four orthopaedic journals were studied. Intervention: None. Main Outcome Measurements: Each of the 116 selected articles was assigned one of the following topics: complications and outcomes, technology, medications and/or anesthesia, logistics, and surgical techniques. AAS and X posts for each article were retrieved. Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to identify differences in the AAS and X posts across journals and topics. Results: Kruskal-Wallis tests revealed a difference between an article’s publishing journal and its AAS (p = 0.034) and number of X posts (p = 0.032), with articles published in the Bone &amp; Joint Journal (BJJ) having the greatest mean AAS (16.27) and X posts (25.73). Kruskal-Wallis tests showed a difference between an article’s topic and its AAS (p = 0.001) and number of X posts (p= 0.027), with articles focused on surgical techniques having the greatest mean AAS (26.50) and X posts (37.00). Conclusions: There is significant variation in the degree of media engagement for hip and knee arthroplasty database studies. The topic of the article (surgical techniques) and journal of publication (BJJ) were associated with a greater level of engagement. Level of Evidence: Level V.

Altmetric and impact analysis of randomized clinical trials in dentistry

ObjectivesThis study investigated altmetrics, citations, and field-normalized impact of dental articles reporting randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published within a one-year period. MethodsData were collected in 2024 from PubMed-indexed RCTs published in 2019. Dependent variables included Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS), PlumX citations, and Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI). Independent variables encompassed article-, author-, and journal-related variables. Adjusted quasi-Poisson regression models were used to assess associations. Point-biserial correlation evaluated the relationship between Journal Impact Factor (JIF) and selected reporting variables. ResultsA total of 653 RCTs were included, with periodontology, implantology, and oral and maxillofacial surgery comprising 50.4% of the sample. Only 28.6% of the articles reported CONSORT use, 49.6% pre-registered their protocol, and 68.8% reported a sample size calculation. Most articles (63.6%) reported no conflicts of interest, with unclear sponsorship being the most frequent (34.6%). Regression analyses revealed significant associations for AAS, PlumX citations, and FWCI with various factors. JIF increased AAS by 17% per unit, PlumX citations by 13%, and FWCI by 6%. Protocol pre-registration boosted AAS by 132%, while mixed or no sponsorship increased PlumX citations by up to 47%. First author H-index increased PlumX citations and FWCI by 1% per unit, while first author continent impacted AAS, citations, and FWCI. Weak positive correlations between JIF and both protocol pre-registration and CONSORT use were observed. No significant differences were observed across different dental fields for any metric. ConclusionAn interplay among article-, author-, and journal-related variables collectively influenced the online attention, citations, and impact of dental RCT articles. Clinical significanceUnderstanding the factors that influence the visibility and impact of dental RCTs can guide researchers in improving the design, reporting, and dissemination of their studies, ultimately enhancing the quality and reach of dental research.

The impact of scholarly podcasts on research distribution and uptake in oncology.

423 Background: Scholarly podcasts have grown in number and popularity in the post-COVID era. While such podcasts aim to increase research readership and understanding, their impact on these areas has not been quantitatively established. We assessed the relationship between Oncology research podcasts and various research distribution metrics. Methods: All research articles published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology (JCO) from January 2023 to December 2023 were reviewed. Published research articles in the JCO not discussed on the JCO or ASCO Clinical Guidelines podcast were used as controls. Google Scholar citations, Dimensions citations, Mendeley readership, News and Blog shares, Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), social media uptake (i.e., twitter shares), and article downloads were gathered, as well as podcast release dates and the presence of editorial(s) associated with the research article. Mann-Whitney U-tests were used to compare the medians of distribution metrics across podcast and control groups. A multivariate regression analysis incorporating confounding variables (accompanying editorial, subject of research, type of research) was completed. All non-research articles published during the inclusion period were removed from both control and podcast groups. Results: 421 research articles were published during the inclusion period, 57 of which were featured on featured in JCO or ASCO Clinical Guidelines Podcast. The median downloads (p &lt; 0.02), AAS (p &lt; 0.001), and Twitter shares (p &lt;0.001) were significantly higher in the podcast group. Median Twitter shares were 2.3x greater in the podcast group, the largest difference for any metric between podcast and control groups. Median Google Scholar citations, Mendeley readership, News shares, and Dimensions citations were not significantly different between podcast and non-podcast groups. Upon multivariable regression analysis, only Twitter shares were significantly greater in the podcast group (β =22.0; 95% CI: 0.4 – 43.7; p=0.046). Similarly, only Twitter shares were significantly affected by the delay (in days) between podcast release and online publishing of the article (r = -0.284, p = 0.03). Conclusions: Of all distribution metrics, Twitter shares were most positively affected by the association of scholarly podcasts with research published in the JCO, while academic measures (i.e., citations) were unaffected by an association with a podcast. These findings can inform the application of podcasts to increase research uptake amongst target audiences.

A comparison of the top 500 papers in clinical nutrition ranked by citation and altmetric attention scores

A comparison of the top 500 papers in clinical nutrition ranked by citation and altmetric attention scores

The Impact of Social Media on Otolaryngology Literature: Analyzing the Correlation Between Altmetrics and Citation Count.

The altmetric attention score (AAS) is an alternative metric that tracks article sharing via online platforms, reflecting an article's online attention trend. The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of social media on Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (OHNS) literature and analyze the correlation between AAS and citation count. A retrospective review of otolaryngology journal article citation data and Altmetric attention score. The top 10 OHNS journals with highest impact factors were identified using the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). The number of citations in 2018 and 2019 were extracted from JCR and AAS was extracted from the altmetrics website. The primary outcome of this study was to establish whether a correlation between AAS and citation count exists, and whether AAS could serve as a valid alternative metric to assess the quality of individual articles. By analyzing data from 3729 articles, a weak statistically significant positive correlation was identified between AAS and citation count (r = 0.18, P < .001), and between number of citations and Twitter activity (r = 0.18, P < .001). In addition, a statistically significant strong correlation was seen between Twitter activity and AAS (r = 0.79, P < .001). The current results clearly illustrate a weak correlation between AAS and citations and between Twitter activity and citations. Due to various limitations, the use of AAS should be limited to serve as a complementary metric to the current gold standard rather than an alternative metric.

The Top 100 Most-Cited Articles on Religion from 2010 to 2023: A Bibliometric and Altmetric Analysis.

In this study, we conducted a bibliometric and altmetric analysis of the top 100 most-cited articles on religion from 2010 to 2023. The data were sourced from the Web of Science Core Collection database. VOSviewer was utilized to create visualization knowledge maps such as co-authorship, co-citation, and keywords co-occurrence analysis, and the Spearman correlation analysis was performed to determine the relationships between the variables. The results indicate that these articles were published in 22 journals by 231 authors in 158 institutions across 24 countries. Most of the articles were published from the USA. Kenneth I. Pargament and Harold G. Koenig were identified as two of the most prominent scholars, while the Journal of Religion and Health and the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality emerged as the most productive and influential journals. The citations for these articles span a range of 45 to 828, whereas the altmetric attention scores (AAS) vary from 1 to 797. The Spearman correlation analysis revealed that the AAS is weakly positively correlated with the article influence score (AIS) ( ) and weakly negatively correlated with the number of years since publication (NYsP) ( ), but is not significantly correlated with other bibliometric indicators; however, it is posited that the importance of the AAS may increase over time as the influence of social media continues to expand.

Effects of research funding on the academic impact and societal visibility of scientific research

Assessing the effectiveness of research funding is of significant value to policymakers. Previous studies have mainly concentrated on the academic impact of funded research, yet the exploration of how research funding affects the societal visibility of research has been significantly lacking. Thus, this study addresses this gap by examining papers published by Chinese scholars and compares the effects of funding on papers’ societal visibility (measured by Altmetric Attention Scores) with those for papers' academic impact (measured by citation counts). This study reveals several interesting findings: First, research supported by funding demonstrates a lower societal visibility, albeit a higher academic impact, compared to those without funding. Second, the societal visibility of research supported by small to moderate number of funding sources is still lower than those without research funding. In contrast, a paper's academic impact is higher if it has a higher number of research funding sources. Third, the effects of funding on papers’ academic impact and societal visibility differ by funding mechanisms—having industry funding significantly increases the societal visibility of research. These findings can aid research policymakers’ funding allocation decisions and inform better assessment of research outcomes.

An examination of the “top 100” articles published in 2023: an altmetric analysis

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the “Top 100” articles that received the highest online attention in 2023. Design/methodology/approach The author examined data obtained from the Dimensions database. They determined the top 100 articles with the highest Altmetric Attention Score published in 2023 using the Dimensions database. The search was done on December 31, 2023, and the publication type was limited to articles. Furthermore, articles were analyzed to identify online attention platforms, subject categories, publication sources, access types and authorship patterns. The data were organized in Microsoft Excel for eventual examination. Findings The most discoursed article in 2023 has an Article Attention Score of 26156. The “Top 100 List” is dominated by COVID-19-related studies. X (249,064), Mendeley (2,445) and News (1,977) are the most prominent sharing and discussion platforms. There is an unequal distribution of articles in 28 subject categories. The top 100 articles were published in 67 journals. The majority of articles are accessible under the open-access model. The top 100 articles are written by 1,323 authors, with an authorship range of 1 to 308. The majority of articles are the result of collaborative work, and the correlation analysis between citations and AAS indicates a weak positive correlation possibly because of different factors influencing each metric and their methods of measuring scholarly impact. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to present online attention to academic articles published in 2023. This study examines the effect of online attention platforms on research, which may be used as a measure of research outcome.

Vascularised Composite Allotransplantation – A guide to optimal dissemination of scientific outputs

PurposeThe impact of academic research is not just important within the clinical domain but within society as a whole. Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) offers a means of assessing how scholarly outputs are interacted with online. Vascularised Composite Allotransplantation (VCA) is a modern but rapidly evolving topic which encompasses a broad range of complex and clinically significant surgical interventions. Primarily VCA is utilised in the reconstruction of complex, composite tissue defects, including limb and face transplantation. There is also a growing interest in the role of VCA as an early means of real-time immuno-monitoring, in sentinel skin flap transplant (SSF). Materials & methodsIn July 2024, a search was conducted using the Altmetric Explorer (AE) database using the search term ‘vascular-composite’ AND ‘allograft’ OR ‘allotransplant’. A simultaneous literature search was carried out using Web of Science (WoS) database utilising the same search terms with extraction of traditional citation-based metrics as well as relevant ‘meso’ and ‘micro’ subject headings. Corresponding citation-based metrics were extracted utilising SCImago. Data was compiled and analysed using a linear regression model with level of significance set at p < 0.05. ResultsThe Top 100 (T100) performing articles relating to VCA displayed a mean Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) of 3.31. All T100 papers were published in the English language. Sixty percent (n = 60) of T100 papers were published in Q1 Journals. News outlet mentions (r = 6.95), blog mentions (r = 6.20), and Twitter/X mentions (r = 0.52) demonstrated the greatest positive impact on AAS upon application of a linear regression model (p < 0.05). ConclusionAltmetric Scores offer a means of appraising the impact of research outputs in both academic and societal domains. Such modern metrics are useful in evolving topics such as VCA as AAS is not dependent on citation counts. Publishing of outputs in high quartile, open access journals with timely utilisation of news and social media outlets should be utilised by researchers aiming to maximise dissemination of research outputs in the field of VCA.

Amplifying Research: The Potential for Podcasts to Boost Radiology Journal Article Exposure.

Background Podcasts have become an increasingly popular method of communicating information in medicine, including in radiology. However, the effect of podcasts on the reach of journal articles remains unclear. Purpose To evaluate the influence of Radiology podcasts on the performance metrics, including downloads, citations, and Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), of Radiology articles. Materials and Methods This was a retrospective study. All articles published in the print version of Radiology from January 2021 to December 2022 were reviewed; editorials and case reports were excluded. Articles featured on Radiology podcasts were included in the podcast group. Articles published within the same journal issue and category were the nonpodcast group. Downloads, Google Scholar citations, Dimensions citations, and AAS metrics were recorded. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare medians and evaluate differences between older and more recently published articles. Results The podcast group, composed of 88 articles, exhibited significantly higher median values for downloads (PG, 4521.0; nonpodcast group, 2123.0; P < .001), Google Scholar citations (podcast group, 14.5; nonpodcast group, 10.0; P = .01), Dimensions citations (podcast group, 12.0; nonpodcast group, 9.0; P = .01), and AAS (podcast group, 43.0; nonpodcast group, 10.0; P < .001) compared with the nonpodcast group of 378 articles. Within both groups, articles published in the earlier nonpodcast group (January to June 2021) had higher downloads (podcast group, P = .08; nonpodcast group, P < .001), Google Scholar citations (podcast group and nonpodcast group, P < .001), and Dimension citations (podcast group and nonpodcast group, P < .001) than articles from the later period (July to December 2022). AAS markedly increased in recent podcast articles (P = .03), but AAS for nonpodcast articles significantly decreased over time (P = .01). Conclusion Radiology articles featured on the Radiology podcast had greater median metrics, including downloads, Google Scholar citations, Dimensions citations, and AAS, compared with nonpodcast articles, suggesting that podcasts can be an effective method of disseminating and amplifying research within the field of radiology. © RSNA, 2024 See also the editorial by Chu and Nicola in this issue.

Which orthodontic articles are accessed online the most? Exploring article usage metrics along with citations and altmetrics.

To investigate the current state of article usage metrics in orthodontics. Out of all orthodontic journals listed in Journal Citation Reports 2022, the European Journal of Orthodontics and The Angle Orthodontist fulfilled the inclusion criteria. All journal issues published in 2021 were scrutinized for original research articles and systematic reviews/meta-analyses, and the following features were collected: article type, subject, title, number of words and authors, Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), X (formerly Twitter) posts, and Mendeley reads. Article citations, number of publications, and h-index of the last authors were retrieved from Web of Science (WoS). 181 articles were considered eligible. The median number of views and downloads of included articles was 1296 (range: 355-10,233) and 793 (range: 167-3629). Page views, downloads, and total views were significantly correlated with WoS citations (rho > 0.345; P < .001). There was no correlation between usage metrics, AAS, X posts, and Mendeley reads. Number of downloads were significantly higher in studies dealing with new technologies, and where the last author had 1-40 publications or an h-index of 0-30. Page views, downloads, and total views were positively correlated with WoS citations and, therefore, may serve as an early estimate of future citations. Significant variations in article downloads may be expected in relation to article subject, scientific productivity, and impact of the last authors.

Citation and Altmetric Attention Score of Top 100 Highly Cited Articles in Health Information Management Journals: A Correlation Study

Citation and Altmetric Attention Score of Top 100 Highly Cited Articles in Health Information Management Journals: A Correlation Study

Bibliometric Analysis of Predictors of Altmetric Attention Scores in Orthopedic Research: Investigating Online Visibility.

Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) captures online attention received by a research article in addition to traditional bibliometrics. We present a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of high AAS articles and identify predictors of AAS in orthopedics. The top 30 articles with highest AAS were selected from orthopedic journals using the Dimensions App. Multilevel mixed-effects linear regression was used to address clustering in articles from the same journal, with journals as the leveling variable. A total of 750 articles from 25 journals were included. In the final multivariable model, the funding source (none, industry, government, foundation, university, or multiple), findings (positive, negative, neutral, or not applicable), and the journal's impact factor were significant at P<.05. Predictors of AAS are similar to predictors of traditional bibliometrics. Future studies need prospective dynamic data to further elucidate the AAS. [Orthopedics. 20XX;4X(X):XXX-XXX.].

Bibliometric top ten healthcare-related ChatGPT publications in the first ChatGPT anniversary.

Since its public release on November 30, 2022, ChatGPT has shown promising potential in diverse healthcare applications despite ethical challenges, privacy issues, and possible biases. The aim of this study was to identify and assess the most influential publications in the field of ChatGPT utility in healthcare using bibliometric analysis. The study employed an advanced search on three databases, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, to identify ChatGPT-related records in healthcare education, research, and practice between November 27 and 30, 2023. The ranking was based on the retrieved citation count in each database. The additional alternative metrics that were evaluated included (1) Semantic Scholar highly influential citations, (2) PlumX captures, (3) PlumX mentions, (4) PlumX social media and (5) Altmetric Attention Scores (AASs). A total of 22 unique records published in 17 different scientific journals from 14 different publishers were identified in the three databases. Only two publications were in the top 10 list across the three databases. Variable publication types were identified, with the most common being editorial/commentary publications (n=8/22, 36.4%). Nine of the 22 records had corresponding authors affiliated with institutions in the United States (40.9%). The range of citation count varied per database, with the highest range identified in Google Scholar (1019-121), followed by Scopus (242-88), and Web of Science (171-23). Google Scholar citations were correlated significantly with the following metrics: Semantic Scholar highly influential citations (Spearman's correlation coefficient ρ=0.840, p<0.001), PlumX captures (ρ=0.831, p<0.001), PlumX mentions (ρ=0.609, p=0.004), and AASs (ρ=0.542, p=0.009). In conclusion, despite several acknowledged limitations, this study showed the evolving landscape of ChatGPT utility in healthcare. There is an urgent need for collaborative initiatives by all stakeholders involved to establish guidelines for ethical, transparent, and responsible use of ChatGPT in healthcare. The study revealed the correlation between citations and alternative metrics, highlighting its usefulness as a supplement to gauge the impact of publications, even in a rapidly growing research field.