The most mentioned neuroimaging articles in online media: a bibliometric analysis of the top 100 articles with the highest Altmetric Attention Scores

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.

Assessing Factors Associated With Altmetric Attention Score: A Preliminary Study of 3 Hand Surgery Journals

BACKGROUND

Traditional measures of evaluating scholarly output do not capture the impact social media can provide in disseminating and promoting research. We sought to better understand the level of online attention that high-quality hand research received.

METHODS

Scientific manuscripts published from 2017 in Journal of Hand Surgery (American Volume) (JHS-A), Journal of Hand Surgery (European Volume) (JHS-E), and HAND were recorded. Manuscript characteristics were determined, including the number of citations. Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), a measure of a manuscript's online attention and impact, was determined, as well as Twitter mentions, Facebook mentions, and news outlet mentions. Spearman rho (ρ) correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the relationship between the number of citations and AAS. Multivariable linear regression analysis was performed to determine which manuscript factors were associated with AAS.

RESULTS

A total of 323 manuscripts were identified. There was a weak positive correlation between the number of citations and AAS; however, this relationship did not exist for each individual journal. Publication in HAND and JHS-E were associated with lower average manuscript AAS when using JHS-A as the reference group. Two additional factors were also associated with increased manuscript AAS: (1) being a clinical study focused on a specific upper extremity anatomical location; and (2) increasing number of institutions on a study.

CONCLUSIONS

Publication in HAND and JHS-E were associated with lower manuscript AAS when using JHS-A as the reference group, suggesting that HAND and JHS-E have room for improvement in using social media to share their high-quality hand surgery scientific articles.

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.

Mapping the scientific research on radiology departments: Global trends in publication, collaboration and trending topics

PURPOSE

To characterize the global research trend in radiology departments based on bibliometric indicators.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

As a source of information, Science Citation Index Expanded and Journal Citation Reports from Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) were used. Annual trends, journals of publication, subject categories of journals, collaboration indexes between authors and institutions, network of cowords and most cited papers were identified and analysed. The period of study was 2009-2018.

RESULTS

283,587 downloaded papers were analysed. The number of articles was increasing, as well as the percentage of funded works. Papers were published in 7314 different journals, being the most productive Plos One (5077), followed by American Journal of Roentgenology (4602) and European Radiology (3644). Most productive subject categories of journals were Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging (86,568 papers), Clinical Neurology (29,722) and Surgery (23,564). International collaboration has increased more than 5 points, from 15.2% in 2009 to 20.7% in 2018.

CONCLUSIONS

Most cited articles were published in high impact journals outside the scope of diagnostic imaging. Most influential topics included technical innovations within imaging modalities. MRI replaced conventional radiography and CT as the imaging technique of choice in imaging research.

A critical review on altmetrics: can we measure the social impact factor?

Altmetrics measure the digital attention received by a research output. They allow us to gauge the immediate social impact of an article by taking real-time measurements of how it circulates in the Internet. While there are several companies offering attention scores, the most extensive are Altmetric.com (Altmetric Attention Score—AAS) and Plum X (Plum Print). As this is an emerging topic, many medical specialities have tried to establish if there is a relationship between an article’s altmetric data and the citations it subsequently receives. The results have varied depending on the research field. In radiology, the social network most used is Twitter and the subspeciality with the highest AAS is neuroimaging. This article will review the process involved from the start when an article is published through to finally obtaining its altmetric score. It will also address the relationship between altmetrics and more traditional approaches focusing on citations in radiology and will discuss the advantages and limitations of these new impact indicators.

Research trends in rabies vaccine in the last three decades: a bibliometric analysis of global perspective

INTRODUCTION

Rabies is an infectious zoonotic viral disease which mainly occurs in Africa and Asia. Dogs are predominantly responsible for rabies transmission contributing up to 99% of all human rabies cases. Rabies is a vaccine preventable disease in both animals and humans.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to quantify and characterize the scientific literature and identify the top most cited studies in rabies vaccine research (RVR) from 1991 to 2020.

METHODS

The data used in this study were downloaded from Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC), Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E) database. Network visualization analysis was performed using VOSviewer software.

RESULTS

A total of 1,042 papers (article: n = 986, 94.6%, review: n = 56, 5.4%) were included in this study. These have been cited 17,390 times with an average citation per paper was 16.69 times. The most frequent publication year was 2019 (n = 75, 7.2%). More than 55% studies were published from the United State of America (USA) (n = 380, 36.5%), France (n = 128, 12.3%), and China (n = 97, 9.3%). The most studied Web of Science (WoS) category was immunology (n = 344, 33%). The most prolific author in RVR was Rupprecht CE (n = 55, 5.3%). 'Vaccine' was the leading journal (n = 218, 20.9%). Rabies was the most widely used keyword.

CONCLUSION

Abundant literature has been published on RVR in developed countries. This study might provide a reference to understand the current and future research trends in RVR. In developing countries research collaboration and co-operation among institutes and researchers needs to be strengthened with developed countries.

Manuscript characteristics associated with the altmetrics score and social media presence: an analysis of seven spine journals

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Impact factor, citation rate, and other traditional measures of scholarly impact do not account for the role that social media has in the dissemination of research. The Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) quantifies the active online presence of individual articles on various platforms (eg, Twitter, Facebook).

PURPOSE

We sought to better understand the factors associated with greater online attention and AAS in seven spine journals.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Cross-sectional study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

No patients were included in this study. We analyzed 380 articles in seven major spine journals.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Extracted manuscript characteristics included AAS; number of Twitter, Facebook, and news outlet mentions; number of citations, references, academic institutions, and authors; and sample size, geographic region, subject of study, and level of evidence.

METHODS

All original scientific manuscripts published in the official January, February, and March 2017 issues of Spine, The Spine Journal, Spine Deformity, Journal of Neurosurgery-Spine, Clinical Spine Surgery, Global Spine Journal, and European Spine Journal were identified. The correlation of AAS and number of citations was determined by Spearman's Rho (ρ) correlation coefficient. Manuscript factors associated with AAS were determined by a multivariable linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 380 manuscripts were included in the analysis. The average AAS across all seven journals was 4.9 (SD: 19.4; Range: 0-356), with the highest average AAS reported for The Spine Journal at 8.0 (SD: 13; Range: 0-60). There was a weak, positive correlation between AAS and number of citations (ρ = .32; p < .05); this relationship was individually present for four out of the seven included journals. In addition, number of references was associated with higher average manuscript AAS (β: 0.16 [95% CI: 0.002-0.32]; p < .05). No manuscript characteristics were associated with lower AAS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis of seven spine journals revealed a weak, positive correlation between AAS and number of citations. Number of references was associated with higher AAS. We believe these findings may be useful to authors seeking ways to maximize the impact of their research.

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

Traditional measures of scholarly impact (i.e., 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 = 0.049), and this finding was consistent for Journal of Burn Care & Research (ρ = 0.21; p = 0.039) and Burns (ρ = 0.15; p = 0.038) 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 = 0.022). Overall, our findings support using both AAS and traditional bibliometrics to assess article impact.

Mammography: density equalizing mapping of the global research architecture

BACKGROUND

Since mammography belongs to the most important preventive techniques in modern medicine, this study maps the related worldwide research output, which encompasses quantitative and qualitative aspects of the scientific activity and socio-economic features.

METHODS

The New Quality and Quantity Indices in Science (NewQIS) computing platform identified all mammography-specific articles in the Web of Science within two time periods, from 1900 to 2014 (P1) and from 2015 to 2020 (P2), a combination of density-equalizing mapping projections (DEMP) and socio-economic benchmarking was applied for analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 13,629 articles were retrieved. 8,744 articles were identified in P1 and 4,885 in P2. More than 100 articles were published annually since the 1980s. Regarding productivity and collaborative efforts, the United States was the leading nation in both evaluation periods. In our socioeconomic analysis, it was also ranked at the first place in P1 [72.68 mammography-related publications per GDP/capita (RGDP)]. The US was followed by the UK and Germany in P1 and by UK and India in P2. When population sizes were related to mammography research activities, Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands showed the highest research activity in P1 (e.g., Sweden: 31.89 publications per 1 million inhabitants). Gender analysis illustrated a relative dominance of female researchers in most countries with the exception of Japan.

CONCLUSIONS

The global mammography research activity over the last century is paralleled by strong international collaborative efforts and follows largely economic figures and prevalence rates but displays distinct differences in comparison to the research landscape of other biomedical entities.

Top-cited articles versus top Altmetric articles in nuclear medicine: a comparative bibliometric analysis

BACKGROUND

The impact of any scientific article has traditionally been measured by the number of citations received. More recently, alternative metrics (altmetrics) reflect the digital dissemination of knowledge across the online mediasphere.

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the characteristics of top-cited articles with those of top Altmetric articles related to nuclear medicine (NM).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed a search of the Web of Science and Altmetric databases using 114 search terms to identify the 50 top-cited and 50 top Altmetric articles, respectively, in the field of NM. We then compared the following characteristics of the selected articles: publication type; journal category; country of origin; year of publication; topic; imaging modality; and accessibility. Chi-square tests were performed for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

There were no overlaps between the 50 top-cited and 50 top Altmetric articles. In general, compared to the leading Altmetric articles in this field, the cited articles were: more frequently review works published in NM and radiology journals (76% vs. 13%, P = 0.000); published in or before 2005 (84% vs. 0%, P = 0.000); the majority were related to oncology (56% vs. 44%, P = 0.000); and originated from the Netherlands (12% vs. 0%, P = 0.000). Compared to the top-cited articles, the leading Altmetric articles were: more frequently original articles published in other clinical field journals (54% vs. 0%, P = 0.000); primarily published between 2016 and 2018 (70% vs. 0%, P = 0.000); focused on neurology (50% vs. 22%, P = 0.000); and originated from the UK (18% vs. 2%, P = 0.000).

CONCLUSION

Citation counts and Altmetric scores represent unique perspectives for evaluating the impact of NM research.

The top 100 most-cited articles citing human brain banking from 1970 to 2020: a bibliometric analysis

Many articles involving human brain banks have been published. Bibliometric analysis can determine the history of the development of research and future research trends in a specific field. Three independent researchers retrieved and reviewed articles from the Web of Science database using the following strategy: "TS = (((brain OR cerebral) AND (bank* OR biobank*)) OR brainbank*)." The top 100 most-cited articles were identified and listed in descending order by total citations. Web of Science was used to identify ten recent articles describing bank construction. GeenMedical ( https://www.geenmedical.com/ ) was used to identify ten recent articles from journals with an impact factor (IF) > 20. The top 100 most-cited articles citing human brain banks were published between 1991 and 2017. Fifty-two percent of the articles focused on a specific type of neurodegenerative disease, and 16% discussed the construction and development of human brain banks. Articles using brain tissue had more total and annual citations than those on bank construction. Ten articles with high IFs were published from 2017 to 2019, and they were primarily studies using novel research techniques such RNA sequencing and genome-wide association studies. Most studies were published in journals specializing in neurology or neuroscience such as Movement Disorders (10%), and had been conducted in the United States (52%) by neurologists (62%). The top 100 most-cited articles and recent publications citing human brain banks and their bibliometric characteristics were identified and analyzed, which may serve as a useful reference and pave the way for further research.

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.

Social media trends in dermatology, dermatopathology, and pathology publications: The social construction of medical subdisciplines

BACKGROUND

An increase in the number of publications on social media has paralleled the growth of social media use in the past decade. Our study examined the trends in these publications relating to the fields of dermatology, pathology, and dermatopathology.

METHODS

PubMed was searched for relevant literature from 2009 to present, using the following key terms: "social media", "dermatology", "dermatopathology", and "pathology." Topics of articles, years of publication, countries of origin, and contributing journals were compiled and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 99 publications was retrieved during the period between January 2009 and November 2019. Top publication years included 2019 (n = 21), 2018 (n = 24), 2017 (n = 20), and 2016 (n = 13). The most common topic areas noted were related to dissemination of information (n = 17; 17.2%), knowledge exchange for physicians (n = 16; 16.2%), and social networking (n = 15; 15.2%).

CONCLUSION

The number of published articles on social media in these specialties has increased since 2009, signifying the widespread use of social media for professional networking, knowledge exchange, real-time communication with patients and colleagues, and patient care. Social media in the areas of dermatology, dermatopathology, and pathology has undergone social construction during the past decade because of changes in technology and ideologies surrounding the use of social media within medicine.

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.

The online attention to research in periodontology: An Altmetric study on the most discussed articles on the web

AIM

To assess the online attention to research in the field of Periodontology. To assess the correlation between the Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) and the citations count in Web of Science (WOS), Scopus and Dimensions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The articles were identified by a search performed through the Dimensions Free App. The search included the six journals related to periodontology listed in the Journal Citation Report (JCR) in the year 2017. The 200 articles with the highest AAS were collected and screened for data related to publication, authorship and research. Citations were harvested from WOS, Scopus and Dimensions.

RESULTS

The Journal of Clinical Periodontology was the most prevalent publication accounting for the 51, 5% of the published items followed by the Journal of Periodontology that published the 34, 5% of the 200 articles with the highest AAS. 65% of these articles were published between 2013 and 2018. The mean AAS was 33, 81 being Tweets and news outlets the most frequent Altmetric resources. Systematic reviews were the most prevalent study design. The correlation between the AAS and the citations in WOS, Dimensions and Scopus was poor. A strong correlation exists between the citations in WOS, Dimensions and Scopus.

CONCLUSIONS

Online attention to periodontal research is high. Systemic interaction studies had a significantly higher visibility. The classic citations count in combination with the AAS can offer a more comprehensive insight into research by highlighting what is valuable for the researcher and for the lay persons. The online profile of journals should be edited to facilitate spread of research information in non-scholar audiences.