Association Between Altmetrics and Traditional Bibliometrics in the Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association and The Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery.

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Dominick J Casciato, Jana Olivová, Bibi N Singh
{"title":"Association Between Altmetrics and Traditional Bibliometrics in the Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association and The Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery.","authors":"Dominick J Casciato, Jana Olivová, Bibi N Singh","doi":"10.7547/21-006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As the dissemination of scientific knowledge pervades social media, appraising impact with traditional bibliometrics led to the creation of alternative metrics, termed altmetrics. Lacking existent foot and ankle surgery literature altmetric analysis, we analyzed the 10 most-cited articles in the Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association (JAPMA) and The Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery (JFAS) in 2013 and 2017.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Citation count, Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), Mendeley Reads, and professional society-affiliated Twitter ages were collected and analyzed with descriptive statistics. Pearson correlation coefficient identified relationships between traditional and nontraditional metrics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 40 articles showed a high median and large range in total citations for JAPMA (13.5 [range, 5-27]) and JFAS (28 [range, 5-69]). Media AAS Mendeley Reads also showed a high median with wide range for both JAPMA (32.5 [range, 0-135]) and JFAS (25 [range, 0-113)]. No significant correlation between total citations and AAS was seen in 2013 (r = -0.205; P = .388) or 2017 (r = -0.029; P = .903). The correlation between total citation count and Mendeley reads was significant in 2017 (r = 0.646; P = .002) but not in 2013 (r = -0.078; P = .744). Although cumulative AAS increased from 2013 to 2017 by 68.75%, with Twitter contributing most to both periods, there existed no significant correlation with Twitter age and the correlation coefficient between AAS and total citations (r = 0.655; P = .173).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results of this investigation show the utility and predictivity of alternative metrics in complementing traditional bibliometrics and encourage the promotion of publications through journal-specific social media.</p>","PeriodicalId":17241,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association","volume":"114 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7547/21-006","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: As the dissemination of scientific knowledge pervades social media, appraising impact with traditional bibliometrics led to the creation of alternative metrics, termed altmetrics. Lacking existent foot and ankle surgery literature altmetric analysis, we analyzed the 10 most-cited articles in the Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association (JAPMA) and The Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery (JFAS) in 2013 and 2017.

Methods: Citation count, Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), Mendeley Reads, and professional society-affiliated Twitter ages were collected and analyzed with descriptive statistics. Pearson correlation coefficient identified relationships between traditional and nontraditional metrics.

Results: The 40 articles showed a high median and large range in total citations for JAPMA (13.5 [range, 5-27]) and JFAS (28 [range, 5-69]). Media AAS Mendeley Reads also showed a high median with wide range for both JAPMA (32.5 [range, 0-135]) and JFAS (25 [range, 0-113)]. No significant correlation between total citations and AAS was seen in 2013 (r = -0.205; P = .388) or 2017 (r = -0.029; P = .903). The correlation between total citation count and Mendeley reads was significant in 2017 (r = 0.646; P = .002) but not in 2013 (r = -0.078; P = .744). Although cumulative AAS increased from 2013 to 2017 by 68.75%, with Twitter contributing most to both periods, there existed no significant correlation with Twitter age and the correlation coefficient between AAS and total citations (r = 0.655; P = .173).

Conclusions: The results of this investigation show the utility and predictivity of alternative metrics in complementing traditional bibliometrics and encourage the promotion of publications through journal-specific social media.

美国足病医学协会杂志》和《足踝外科杂志》中 Altmetrics 与传统文献计量学之间的关联。
背景:随着科学知识在社交媒体上的传播,传统文献计量学对影响力的评估导致了替代指标的产生,这些指标被称为altmetrics。由于缺乏足踝外科文献的altmetric分析,我们分析了2013年和2017年《美国足病医学会杂志》(JAPMA)和《足踝外科杂志》(JFAS)上被引用最多的10篇文章:方法:收集引文数量、Altmetric关注度得分(AAS)、Mendeley阅读量和专业学会所属推特年龄,并进行描述性统计分析。皮尔逊相关系数确定了传统指标与非传统指标之间的关系:40篇文章中,JAPMA(13.5 [范围,5-27])和JFAS(28 [范围,5-69])的总引用次数中位数较高,范围较大。JAPMA 和 JFAS 的媒体 AAS Mendeley 阅读量中位数也较高(32.5 [范围,0-135]),范围较大(25 [范围,0-113])。2013年(r = -0.205;P = .388)和2017年(r = -0.029;P = .903)总被引频次与AAS之间没有明显的相关性。总引用次数与Mendeley阅读次数之间的相关性在2017年显著(r = 0.646; P = .002),但在2013年不显著(r = -0.078; P = .744)。虽然从2013年到2017年,累计AAS增加了68.75%,其中推特对这两个时期的贡献最大,但推特年龄与AAS和总被引次数之间的相关系数(r = 0.655; P = .173)不存在显著相关性:这项调查的结果表明,替代指标在补充传统文献计量学方面具有实用性和预测性,并鼓励通过特定期刊的社交媒体推广出版物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
128
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, the official journal of the Association, is the oldest and most frequently cited peer-reviewed journal in the profession of foot and ankle medicine. Founded in 1907 and appearing 6 times per year, it publishes research studies, case reports, literature reviews, special communications, clinical correspondence, letters to the editor, book reviews, and various other types of submissions. The Journal is included in major indexing and abstracting services for biomedical literature.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信