Mean Altmetric Attention Score Research Articles

Open Access Publication in Total Ankle Arthroplasty Literature Is Associated With Increased Social Media Attention, but Not Increased Citations.

Open access (OA) publications are increasingly common in orthopaedic literature. However, whether OA publications are associated with increased readership or citations among total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) literature is unclear. We hypothesize that compared with non-OA status, OA status is associated with increased social media dissemination, and readership, but not with citation count. This study aimed to analyze social media attention, citations, readership, and cost of TAA OA and non-OA publications. Using a PubMed query search, there were 368 publications from 81 journals, with 25% (91/368) being OA articles and 75% (277/368) non-OA articles from 2016 to 2023. We analyzed the Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), Mendeley readership score, and citations between OA vs non-OA articles. Citations and cost of OA articles were determined using an altered timeline and publisher's website, respectively. Subgroup analysis was performed among articles published in the top 5 TAA journals (Tables 2 and 3). Negative binomial regression was used while adjusting for days since publication. Significance was considered at P <.05. OA publication was associated with a larger mean AAS score (8.7 ± 37.0 vs 4.8 ± 26.3), Mendeley readership (42.4 ± 41.6 vs 34.9 ± 25.7), and Twitter mentions (4.6 ± 7.4 vs 3.3 ± 8.1), but not citations (19.7 ± 24.8 vs 20.3 ± 23.5) (Table 1). TAA OA publications and top 5 journals were associated with significantly increased social media attention but not Mendeley readership or citation counts.

Open Access Publication in Total Knee Arthroplasty Is Associated With Increased Social Media Attention, but Is Not Associated With Increased Citations

BackgroundOpen access (OA) publication is growing in total joint arthroplasty literature. While OA manuscripts are free to view, these publications require a fee from authors. This study aimed to compare social media attention and citation rates between OA and non-OA publications in the total knee arthroplasty (TKA) literature. MethodsThere were 9,606 publications included, with 4,669 (48.61%) as OA articles. The TKA articles were identified from 2016 to 2022. Articles were grouped as OA or non-OA and Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), a weighted count of social media attention, and the Mendeley readership were analyzed using negative binomial regressions while adjusting for days since publication. ResultsThe OA articles had greater mean AAS (13.45 versus 8.42, P = .012) and Mendeley readership (43.91 versus 36.72, P < .001). OA was not an independent predictor of number of citations when compared to non-OA articles (13.98 versus 13.63, P = .914). Subgroup analysis of studies in the top 10 arthroplasty journals showed OA was not an independent predictor of AAS (13.51 versus 9.53, P = .084) or number of citations (19.51 versus 18.74, P = .495) but was an independent predictor of Mendeley readership (49.05 versus 40.25, P < .003). ConclusionThe OA publications in the TKA literature were associated with increased social media attention, but not overall citations. This association was not observed among the top 10 journals. Authors may use these results to weigh the relative importance of readership, citations, and online engagement to the cost of OA publication.

Twitter Use Among Orthopedic Surgery Journals Correlates With Increased Citation Rates.

Use of alternative online means of distribution for research is a rapidly evolving area in orthopedics. In this study, we investigate the impact of Twitter on research citation rates and the association between Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) and citation rates across major orthopedic journals. Original research articles published in a selection of 10 journals between January 2018 and December 2018 were analyzed for number and source of tweets, AAS, and number of citations. We determined the relationship between Twitter use of different sources and number of citations across all journals and within each individual journal, any statistical differences in citations and AAS for tweeted vs nontweeted articles, and the correlation between journal impact factor and average number of monthly tweets. We included 2916 articles in our study, at an average of 26 months after publication. The mean AAS was 9.7 (SD, 45.1; range, 0-1125), and mean citation rate was 6.4 (SD, 8.5; range, 0-166). Impact factor was strongly correlated with average monthly tweets (r2=0.77). Tweeted articles received 8.51 citations on average, compared with 2.56 citations for nontweeted articles (P<.05). Tweets sent by the author/department had the highest impact on future citations (P<.01). Tweets by news outlets had a smaller, positive effect on citations (P<.01). Tweets sent by Arthroscopy (P<.01) and Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics (P<.01) had high impacts compared with other journals. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(1):e38-e44.].

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 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.

Scientometric Analysis of the Top 50 Most-Cited Joint Arthroplasty Papers: Traditional vs Altmetric Measures

BackgroundAlternative scientometric measures have introduced a novel view of the scientific literature. This study aimed to identify the top 50 most-cited recent articles in the field of knee and hip arthroplasty, characterize their traditional and alternative scientometric measures, and determine the relationship between traditional and alternative scientometric measures.Material and methodsThe 50 most-cited articles with the term “arthroplasty” in the title that were published between 2015 and 2019 were retrieved from the Scopus database. Alternative scientometric parameters such as Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) from Altmetrics bookmarklet (Altmetrics.com) were retrieved. Scientometric variables such as journal impact factor, first author H-index, and keywords were also extracted.ResultsThe 50 most-cited papers accrued 7955 total citations, with a mean of 159.10 ± 56.4 citations per article. The overall mean AAS across the papers was 63.4 ± 164.8. The mean first author’s H-index was 23.8 ± 18.9. Papers published in 2017 and 2018 had a significantly higher mean AAS than those published in 2015 and 2016 (35.1 vs 22.5, P = .009). Citation count was weakly correlated with the AAS (correlation coefficient = 0.379, P = .009). Also, AAS had significant correlations with the journal’s impact factor (P < .001).ConclusionWe found that the AAS was highest in more recently published papers, while citation count had the opposite trend. The AAS was significantly correlated with the journal’s impact factor and citation count, but the correlation is weak. This suggests that the alternative scientometric measures are complementary to, and not substitutes for, complement traditional measures such as citation count and impact factor.

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

PurposeTo compare social media attention and citation rates between technique articles and matched original research articles (ORAs) regarding surgical procedures.MethodsAll 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.ResultsA 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.ConclusionsTechnique 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 RelevanceAn 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.

Altmetric and bibliometric analysis of obstetrics and gynecology research: influence of public engagement on citation potential

Whether research engagement on social media and other public platforms results in increased citations in obstetrics and gynecology remains uncertain. The Altmetric Attention Score is a metric of research influence based on mentions on social media and public platforms, such as newsfeeds and Wikipedia. The correlation between Altmetric Attention Scores, absolute citation rates, and the Relative Citation Ratio (a novel metric of research engagement also based on citation rates) in obstetrics and gynecology research is uncertain. To evaluate the correlation between Altmetric Attention Score, absolute citation rate, and Relative Citation Ratio for articles published in obstetrics and gynecology journals from 2004 to 2019. Our second objective was to identify, characterize, and compare the 100 articles with highest Altmetric Attention Scores, the 100 most-cited articles, and the 100 articles with highest Relative Citation Ratios. We performed a cross-sectional altmetric and bibliometric study of all obstetrics and gynecology articles indexed in the National Institutes of Health Open Citation Collection from 2004 to 2019. Articles were included if they were published in obstetrics and gynecology journals according to InCites Journal Citation Reports indexing. Citation data, including citation numbers and Relative Citation Ratios, were downloaded on March 20, 2021 and merged with altmetric data from the Altmetric Explorer on the basis of each article's unique PubMed identification number. We assessed correlation between Altmetric Attention Scores and number of citations and Altmetric Attention Scores and Relative Citation Ratios by calculating the Pearson correlation coefficient. The 100 articles with highest Altmetric Attention Scores, the 100 most-cited articles, and the 100 articles with highest Relative Citation Ratios were characterized and compared using means (standard deviations) and mean differences (95% confidence intervals). There were 156,592 articles published in 82 obstetrics and gynecology journals and indexed in the National Institutes of Health Open Citation Collection between 2004 and 2019. The correlation coefficient was 0.18 (95% confidence interval, 0.17-0.19) for Altmetric Attention Scores vs number of citations and 0.10 (95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.11) for Altmetric Attention Scores vs Relative Citation Ratios. There was no overlap among the 100 articles on the highest Altmetric Attention Score list and the 100 most-cited list, and there was minimal overlap among the 100 articles on the highest Altmetric Attention Score list and the 100 highest Relative Citation Ratio list (98 unique articles on each list). Articles with highest Altmetric Attention Scores generated substantially more engagement on social media and other public platforms than most-cited articles (mean Altmetric Attention Score, 763.1 [standard deviation, 520.8] vs 49.9 [standard deviation, 81.6]; mean difference,-713.2 [95% confidence interval,-819.9 to -606.6]) and highest Relative Citation Ratio articles (mean, 116.2 [standard deviation, 415.9]; mean difference,-661.5 [95% confidence interval,-746.2 to-576.9]). In contrast, the articles with highest Altmetric Attention Scores generated far fewer citations than most-cited articles (mean, 39.7 [standard deviation, 47.6] vs 541.8 [standard deviation, 312.8]; mean difference, 502.0 [95% confidence interval, 439.0-565.0]) and highest Relative Citation Ratio articles (mean, 458.9 [standard deviation, 363.5]; mean difference, 427.7 [95% confidence interval, 353.8-501.6]). Nearly half of articles with highest Altmetric Attention Scores were basic/translational studies, often about menopause and environmental factors impacting fertility, whereas most-cited articles and articles with highest Relative Citation Ratios were more likely to be reviews and consensus statements, respectively, often about placentation and polycystic ovary syndrome, respectively. Articles with highest Altmetric Attention Scores were more likely to be published as open-access. There seems to be weak short-term correlation between Altmetric Attention Scores and citation rates. Further study is warranted to ascertain whether there may be long-term correlation between alternative metrics and citation rates in obstetrics and gynecology.

Influenza Altmetric Attention Score and its association with the influenza season in the USA.

Background:Altmetrics measure the impact of journal articles by tracking social media, Wikipedia, public policy documents, blogs, and mainstream news activity, after which an overall Altmetric attention score (AAS) is calculated for every journal article. In this study, we aim to assess the AAS for influenza related articles and its relation to the influenza season in the USA. Methods:This study used the openly available Altmetric data from Altmetric.com. First, we retrieved all influenza-related articles using an advanced PubMed search query, then we inputted the resulted query into Altmetric explorer. We then calculated the average AAS for each month during the years 2012-2018. Results : A total of 24,964 PubMed documents were extracted, among them, 12,395 documents had at least one attention. We found a significant difference in mean AAS between February and each of January and March (p< 0.001, mean difference of 117.4 and 460.7, respectively). We found a significant difference between June and each of May and July (p< 0.001, mean difference of 1221.4 and 162.7, respectively). We also found a significant difference between October and each of September and November (p< 0.001, mean difference of 88.8 and 154.8, respectively). Conclusion:We observed a seasonal trend in the attention toward influenza-related research, with three annual peaks that correlated with the beginning, peak, and end of influenza seasons in the USA, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data.

Influenza Altmetric Attention Score and its association with the influenza season in the USA.

Background:Altmetrics measure the impact of journal articles by tracking social media, Wikipedia, public policy documents, blogs, and mainstream news activity, after which an overall Altmetric attention score (AAS) is calculated for every journal article. In this study, we aim to assess the AAS for influenza related articles and its relation to the influenza season in the USA. Methods:This study used the openly available Altmetric data from Altmetric.com. First, we retrieved all influenza-related articles using an advanced PubMed search query, then we inputted the resulted query into Altmetric explorer. We then calculated the average AAS for each month during the years 2012-2018. Results : A total of 24,964 PubMed documents were extracted, among them, 12,395 documents had at least one attention. We found a significant difference in mean AAS between February and each of January and March (p< 0.001, mean difference of 117.4 and 460.7, respectively). We found a significant difference between June and each of May and July (p< 0.001, mean difference of 1221.4 and 162.7, respectively). We also found a significant difference between October and each of September and November (p< 0.001, mean difference of 88.8 and 154.8, respectively). Conclusion:We observed a seasonal trend in the attention toward influenza-related research, with three annual peaks that correlated with the beginning, peak, and end of influenza seasons in the USA, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data.

Influenza Altmetric Attention Score and its association with the influenza season in USA

Background : Altmetrics measure the impact of journal articles by tracking social media, Wikipedia, public policy documents, blogs, and mainstream news activity, after which an overall Altmetric attention score (AAS) is calculated for every journal article. In this study, we aim to assess the AAS for influenza related articles and its relation to the influenza season in USA. Methods : This study used the openly available Altmetric data from Altmetric.com. First, we retrieved all influenza-related articles using an advanced PubMed search query, then we inputted the resulted query into Altmetric explorer. We then calculated the average AAS for each month during the years 2012-2018. Results : A total of 24,964 PubMed documents were extracted, among them, 12,395 documents had at least one attention. We found a significant difference in mean AAS between February and each of January and March (p< 0.001, mean difference of 117.4 and 460.7, respectively). We found a significant difference between June and each of May and July (p< 0.001, mean difference of 1221.4 and 162.7, respectively). We also found a significant difference between October and each of September and November (p< 0.001, mean difference of 88.8 and 154.8, respectively). Conclusion : We observed a seasonal trend in the attention toward influenza-related research, with three annual peaks that correlated with the beginning, peak, and end of influenza seasons in USA, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data.

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

Altmetric Attention Score: Evaluating the Social Media Impact of Burn Research.

Traditional measures of scholarly impact (ie, impact factor, citation rate) do not account for the role of social media in knowledge dissemination. The Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) tracks the online sharing activity of articles on platforms such as Twitter and Facebook. All 285 original scientific articles published in Journal of Burn Care & Research and Burns from January to December 2017 were obtained from official journal websites. Article characteristics extracted include AAS; number of Twitter, Facebook, and news outlet mentions; subject of study and study design; number of citations; number of authors and academic institutions; and others. The average AAS for all articles was 6.1 (SD: 48; range: 0 to 611) in which 156 (55%) of those had Twitter mentions. The mean AAS for Journal of Burn Care & Research and Burns were 7.7 (SD: 54; range: 0 to 536) and 5.3 (SD: 45; range: 0 to 611), respectively. There was a weak, positive correlation between AAS and citation count for all articles (ρ = 0.12; P = .049), and this finding was consistent for Journal of Burn Care & Research (ρ = 0.21; P = .039) and Burns (ρ = 0.15; P = .038) individually. The weak correlation between the two metrics supports that AAS and citation count capture the attention of different audiences. In addition, studies discussing skin grafting were associated with higher average AAS (β: 29 [95% CI: 4.2 to 54]; P = .022). Overall, our findings support using both AAS and traditional bibliometrics to assess article impact.

Science Map of Cochrane Systematic Reviews Receiving the Most Altmetric Attention Score: A Network Analysis

The present study aimed to analyze and visualize the science map of Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs) with high Altmetric attention score (AAS). On 2020-07-29, the altmetric data of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were obtained from the Altmetric database (Altmetric LLP, London, UK). Bibliometric data of the top 5% AAS of CSRs were extracted from the Web of Science. Keyword co-occurrence, co-authorship and co-citation network analyses were then employed using VOSviewer software. The random forest model was used to rank the importance of the altmetric resource. A total of 11222 CSRs with AAS were found (Total mentions: 305265), with Twitter being the most popular Altmetric resource. Consequently, the top 5% AAS (649 articles, mean AAS: 204.95, 95% confidence level: 18.95, mean citations: 123.68, 95% confidence level: 13.9) were included. Density mapping revealed female, adult and child as the most popular author keywords. According to network visualization, Helen V. Worthington (University of Manchester, Manchester, UK), the University of Oxford and UK had the greatest impact on the network at the author, organization and country levels respectively. AAS were weekly correlated with citations (rs=0.21) although citations were moderately correlated with policy document and blog mentions (rs=0.46 and rs=0.43). Cochrane systematic reviews received high levels of online attention, particularly in the Twittersphere and mostly from the UK. However, CSRs were rarely publicized and discussed using recently developed academic tools, such as F1000 prime, Publons and PubPeer.

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.

Introduction: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.Methods:All RCTs from 2016 published in The Journal of Arthroplasty, The Bone and Joint Journal, The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Clinical Orthopedics and Related Research, The Journal of Knee Surgery, Hip International, and Acta Orthopaedica were extracted. Methodologic bias was graded with the JADAD scale, whereas study bias was graded with the Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCTs. Publication characteristics, social media attention (Facebook, Twitter, and Mendeley), AAS, citation rates, and bias were analyzed.Results:A total of 42 articles were identified. The mean (±SD) citations and AAS per RCT was 17.8 ± 16.5 (range, 0 to 78) and 8.0 ± 15.4 (range, 0 to 64), respectively. The mean JADAD score was 2.6 ± 0.94. No statistically significant differences were observed in the JADAD score or total number of study biases when compared across the seven journals (P = 0.57 and P = 0.27). Higher JADAD scores were significantly associated with higher AAS scores (β = 6.7, P = 0.006) but not citation rate (P = 0.16). The mean number of study biases was 2.0 ± 0.93 (range, 0 to 4). A greater total number of study biases was significantly with higher AAS scores (β = −8.0, P < 0.001) but not citation rate (P = 0.10). The AAS was a significant and positive predictor of citation rate (β = 0.43, P = 0.019).Conclusion:High methodologic quality and limited study bias markedly contribute to the AAS of RCTs in the total joint arthroplasty literature. The AAS may be used as a proxy measure of scientific quality for RCTs, although readers should still critically appraise these articles before making changes to clinical practice.

Knowledge syntheses in medical education: Abibliometric analysis.

PurposeThis bibliometric analysis maps the landscape of knowledge syntheses in medical education. It provides scholars with a roadmap for understanding where the field has been and where it might go in the future, thereby informing research and educational practice. In particular, this analysis details the venues in which knowledge syntheses are published, the types of syntheses conducted, citation rates they produce, and altmetric attention they garner.MethodIn 2020, the authors conducted a bibliometric analysis of knowledge syntheses published in 14 core medical education journals from 1999 to 2019. To characterize the studies, metadata were extracted from PubMed, Web of Science, Altmetrics Explorer, and Unpaywall.ResultsThe authors analyzed 963 knowledge syntheses representing 3.1% of the total articles published (n = 30,597). On average, 45.9 knowledge syntheses were published annually (SD = 35.85, median = 33), and there was an overall 2620% increase in the number of knowledge syntheses published from 1999 to 2019. The journals each published, on average, a total of 68.8 knowledge syntheses (SD = 67.2, median = 41) with Medical Education publishing the most (n = 189; 19%). Twenty-one types of knowledge synthesis were identified, the most prevalent being systematic reviews (n = 341; 35.4%) and scoping reviews (n = 88; 9.1%). Knowledge syntheses were cited an average of 53.80 times (SD = 107.12, median = 19) and received a mean Altmetric Attention Score of 14.12 (SD = 37.59, median = 6).ConclusionsThere has been considerable growth in knowledge syntheses in medical education over the past 20 years, contributing to medical education’s evidence base. Beyond this increase in volume, researchers have introduced methodological diversity in these publications, and the community has taken to social media to share knowledge syntheses. Implications for the field, including the impact of synthesis types and their relationship to knowledge translation, are discussed.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s40037-020-00626-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

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

BackgroundTo 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).MethodThe 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.ResultsThe 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.ConclusionsFew 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.

Orthopaedic Randomized Controlled Trials Published in General Medical Journals Are Associated With Higher Altmetric Attention Scores and Social Media Attention Than Nonorthopaedic Randomized Controlled Trials

To (1) compare the Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) and citation rates between orthopaedic and nonorthopaedic randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from 5 high-impact medical journals and (2) identify general characteristics of these articles associated with greater exposure on social media platforms. Articles published in The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Lancet, The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Annals of Internal Medicine, and Archives of Internal Medicine between January 2011 and December 2016 were analyzed. These journals were selected based on retaining high impact factors with rigorous publication standards and availability of the AAS for their publications. The queried time frame was chosen to balance the inception of the AAS with an optimal period for citation accrual. A total of 14 article characteristics, in addition to number of Tweets, Facebook shares, news mentions, and the AAS, were extracted. Inclusion criteria were orthopaedic RCTs reporting on outcomes after surgical intervention. Linear regression was used to assess the relationship between publication characteristics and the AAS and social media attention. A total of 9 orthopaedic and 59 nonorthopaedic RCTs were included. The mean AASs were significantly different (574 ± 565.7 versus 256.9 ± 222.3, P= .003), whereas citation rate was not (192.2 ± 117.1 versus 382.3 ± 560.3, P= .317). Orthopaedic RCTs had a significantly greater number of mentions on Twitter and Facebook (P < .001). A higher AAS significantly associated with a greater number of citations (β= 0.75, P= .019) for orthopaedic RCTs. The mean AAS of orthopaedic RCTs favoring nonoperative management (809.6 ± 676.3) was greater than those favoring operative treatment (292.0 ± 248.9) but was not statistically significant (P=.361). Orthopaedic RCTs published in 5 high-impact general medical journals had a significantly greater mean AAS relative to nonorthopaedic RCTs, with no differences in citation rates. Additionally, there was a strong association between the AAS and citation rate of orthopaedic RCTs. Orthopaedic RCTs had greater social media exposure on both Twitter and Facebook. Orthopaedic surgeons, researchers, and providers who publish RCTs in high-impact medical journals can anticipate extensive social media attention for their articles relative to other nonorthopaedic RCTs in the same journals. Social media attention may be related to operative versus nonoperative management topics. This study provides further evidence for the increasing use of the AAS and its association with citation accrual.

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

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

P60. The top 100 spine surgery articles on social media: an altmetric study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT This study aims to discern how social media outlets contributed to spine surgery literature dissemination and to investigate how popular articles compared to articles with most citations. Scientific literature is increasingly distributed via social media. The influence of social media on the promulgation of orthopedic spine surgery literature has not been investigated. The Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) is calculated from each article's social media presence in outlets such as news, blogs, Facebook, Twitter, etc. PURPOSE This study will determine if any factors are associated with online popularity as measured by AAS. The primary aim of this investigation is to discern what social media outlets most contribute to dissemination of spine surgery literature. Our secondary purpose is to investigate how article popularity compares to traditional metrics such as citations and impact factors. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING Retrospective. PATIENT SAMPLE A total of 13,601 peer-reviewed articles on spine surgery were included. OUTCOME MEASURES AAS, social media presence, citation number. METHODS The Altmetric database was used to perform a search of nine spine surgery journals from January 2010-October 2019. AAS-related variable averages were summarized alongside metrics such as citation count and impact factor. Spearman rank and time-controlled partial correlations examined the association between AAS and online sources, readers and citations. Journals were grouped by impact factor, and an analysis-of-variance compared mean AAS. The 100 highest AAS articles were compared to the 100 most cited. RESULTS A total of 13,601 articles included. The mean AAS was 5.3 ± 29.8, with Twitter contributing the most (4.5). The three highest associations were Twitter (0.649 vs 0.755), news (0.537 vs 0.857), and Facebook (0.409 vs 0.501). There was no significance between impact factor and AAS. Comparing the top 100 AAS articles to those with most citations, the most popular articles on social media had more article types (10 types vs 5 types), more prospective studies (42 vs 21), fewer retrospective studies (22 vs 40), fewer reviews (7 vs 17) and fewer systematic reviews (14 vs 20). Spine contributed the most articles in the top 100 AAS and citation sets. There is a weak correlation between impact factor and citation rate, and there is not statistically significant relationship between Altmetric attention score and impact factor (p CONCLUSIONS This is the first study using the AAS to evaluate social media underpinnings of peer-reviewed spine surgery literature dissemination. Our evaluation revealed Twitter, newsfeeds and Facebook were the most significant social media outlets. Compared to articles with the greatest citations, the most popular articles are prospective and encompass broader study designs. Social media plays an integral role in article dissemination in spine literature and the public sphere. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.