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

A comparison of the top 500 papers in Clinical Nutrition ranked by citation and Altmetric Attention Scores

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Citation scores (CS) have been traditionally used to measure the impact of scientific publications. Sourced from the Internet, Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS) are complementary metrics that assess how often publications are discussed and used globally. We compared by rank the top 500 papers by CS and AAS published in Clinical Nutrition with corresponding AAS and CS.

METHODS

A search for all publications in Clinical Nutrition was performed on Dimensions (https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication) on 3rd April 2024. Outputs were ranked according to CS and then by AAS with the top 500 in each category selected. Scores, year and type of publication were recorded. Correlation was expressed as the Spearman's rank coefficient (ϱ).

RESULTS

We identified 18,790 outputs. Within the top 500 publications ranked by CS, there was a significant weak positive correlation (ϱ = 0.235, P < 0.0001) between CS [median (IQR) 149 (116-223)] and AAS [7 (3-22)]. Ranked by AAS, there was a non-significant very weak positive correlation (ϱ = 0.072, P = 0.106) between AAS [55.5 (36-115)] and CS [42 (16.5-94.5)]. Trends remained similar when grouped by publication type. Guidelines, ranked by CS, had the highest CS and ranked by AAS, the highest CS and AAS. Publications per year, by year, ranked by CS, had a negatively skewed distribution peaking in 2012 and declined thereafter, but when ranked by AAS, had a moderately positive linear trend from 2001 to 2024 (ϱ = 0.513, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Correlation between CS and AAS was weak. Guidelines had the highest CS and AAS. CS are iterative taking years to mature while AAS are immediate.

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.

Alternative publication metrics in the time of COVID-19

Alternative metrics are unique bibliometrics comprising social, news, and other sources of media outside of traditional academic citations. Some have suggested that these metrics can complement traditional metrics of research impact, including public engagement with research. The COVID-19 pandemic provides a unique opportunity to study alternative metrics and the dissemination of scientific research given the heightened academic and public interest. This study analyzed Altmetric Attention Scores for the top 25 publications on COVID-19 and the top 25 non-COVID-19 publications in 2020. There were significantly higher levels of social attention scores across multiple metrics for COVID-19 articles than for non-COVID-19 articles for that year. There was a slightly higher goodness of fit between Altmetric Attention Scores and academic citations for COVID-19 publications than for non-COVID-19 publications, although trendline differences were not significant. These results suggest that researchers should be aware that their studies can become highly visible on publicly available social and news media platforms, especially during events of high interest (such as a global pandemic).

News and social media coverage is associated with more downloads and citations of manuscripts that focus on substance use

BACKGROUND

A variety of substance use-related topics are discussed in the public discourse; however, it is unknown how public discussion of published substance-related findings relates to manuscript downloads and citations. This manuscript examines how traditional and social media coverage of published findings about substance use affects downloads and scientific citations.

METHODS

Altmetric and bibliographic information was obtained for manuscripts published in Drug and Alcohol Dependence between 2018 and 2019 (n = 943). Associations were examined between news and social media coverage (i.e., Twitter, Facebook) in relation to number of manuscript downloads and number of citations. This was done in a bivariable manner and in a multivariable manner examining correlates of being in the top 10^th percentile of downloads and citations.

RESULTS

73.3 % of articles were shared on Twitter, 23.6 % were shared on Facebook, and 13.9 % were covered in news sources (with 4.0 % receiving major media coverage). Epidemiology papers were among the most covered in the news, and e-cigarette review papers were among the most downloaded. News and social media coverage were positively associated with number of downloads and citations in bivariable models and with achieving the top 10 % of downloads and citations in multivariable models (ps < .001). Publishing a press release was associated with higher likelihood of receiving additional news coverage (aPR = 7.85, 95 % CI: 5.15-11.97).

CONCLUSIONS

Traditional and social media coverage of manuscripts focusing on substance use are associated with more downloads and citations. Researchers should consider sharing findings not only to increase downloads and citations but also to educate the general public.