Examining the Relationship between Altmetric Score and Traditional Bibliometrics in the Ophthalmology Literature for 2013 and 2016 Cohorts

Background In this study, we reviewed a select sample of ophthalmology literature to determine if there was a correlation between Altimetric and traditional citation-based and impact factor metrics. We hypothesized that Altmetric score would more closely correlate with impact factor and citations in...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Zachary C. Wiley, Carter J. Boyd, Shivani Ananthasekar, Nita Bhat, Shruthi Harish Bindiganavile, Andrew G. Lee
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc. 2021
Materias:	citations twitter ophthalmology altmetric social media Ophthalmology RE1-994
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/040fc01e76d745c7a4ff75e9fc1eacd5
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:040fc01e76d745c7a4ff75e9fc1eacd5
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:040fc01e76d745c7a4ff75e9fc1eacd52021-11-11T00:20:34ZExamining the Relationship between Altmetric Score and Traditional Bibliometrics in the Ophthalmology Literature for 2013 and 2016 Cohorts2475-475710.1055/s-0041-1728658https://doaj.org/article/040fc01e76d745c7a4ff75e9fc1eacd52021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0041-1728658https://doaj.org/toc/2475-4757Background In this study, we reviewed a select sample of ophthalmology literature to determine if there was a correlation between Altimetric and traditional citation-based and impact factor metrics. We hypothesized that Altmetric score would more closely correlate with impact factor and citations in 2016. Methods Journal Citation Reports for the year 2013 was used to find the 15 highest impact factor ophthalmology journals in 2013. Then Elsevier's Scopus was used to identify the 10 most cited articles from each journal for the years 2013 and 2016. Metrics for all identified articles were collected using the Altmetric Bookmarklet, and date of Twitter account creation was noted for journals with such an account. Altmetric scores, impact factor, and citation counts were tabulated for each article. Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) determined correlation of independent variables (number of citations or impact factor) with dependent variable (Altmetric score). For our Twitter analysis, account age was the independent variable and calculated correlation coefficients (r) were the dependent variable. Proportion of variance was determined with a coefficient of determination (R 2). Results This study included 300 articles, evenly split between 2013 and 2016. Within the 2013 cohort, three journals had significant positive correlations between citation count and Altmetric score. For the 2016 cohort, both Altmetric score and citation count (r = 0.583, p < 0.001) and Altmetric score and impact factor (r = 0.183, p = 0.025) revealed significant positive correlations. In 2016, two journals were found to have significant correlations between Altmetric score and citation number. Neither year revealed a significant correlation between the age of a journal's Twitter profile and the relationship between Altmetric score and citation count. In each year, Twitter accounted for the highest number of mentions. Conclusion The findings suggest that correlation between Altmetric score and traditional quality metric scores may be increasing. Altmetric score was correlated with impact factor and number of citations in 2016 but not 2013. At this time, Altmetrics are best used as an adjunct that is complementary but not an alternative to traditional bibliometrics for assessing academic productivity and impact.Zachary C. WileyCarter J. BoydShivani AnanthasekarNita BhatShruthi Harish BindiganavileAndrew G. LeeThieme Medical Publishers, Inc.articlecitationstwitterophthalmologyaltmetricsocial mediaOphthalmologyRE1-994ENJournal of Academic Ophthalmology, Vol 13, Iss 01, Pp e89-e95 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	citations twitter ophthalmology altmetric social media Ophthalmology RE1-994
spellingShingle	citations twitter ophthalmology altmetric social media Ophthalmology RE1-994 Zachary C. Wiley Carter J. Boyd Shivani Ananthasekar Nita Bhat Shruthi Harish Bindiganavile Andrew G. Lee Examining the Relationship between Altmetric Score and Traditional Bibliometrics in the Ophthalmology Literature for 2013 and 2016 Cohorts
description	Background In this study, we reviewed a select sample of ophthalmology literature to determine if there was a correlation between Altimetric and traditional citation-based and impact factor metrics. We hypothesized that Altmetric score would more closely correlate with impact factor and citations in 2016. Methods Journal Citation Reports for the year 2013 was used to find the 15 highest impact factor ophthalmology journals in 2013. Then Elsevier's Scopus was used to identify the 10 most cited articles from each journal for the years 2013 and 2016. Metrics for all identified articles were collected using the Altmetric Bookmarklet, and date of Twitter account creation was noted for journals with such an account. Altmetric scores, impact factor, and citation counts were tabulated for each article. Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) determined correlation of independent variables (number of citations or impact factor) with dependent variable (Altmetric score). For our Twitter analysis, account age was the independent variable and calculated correlation coefficients (r) were the dependent variable. Proportion of variance was determined with a coefficient of determination (R 2). Results This study included 300 articles, evenly split between 2013 and 2016. Within the 2013 cohort, three journals had significant positive correlations between citation count and Altmetric score. For the 2016 cohort, both Altmetric score and citation count (r = 0.583, p < 0.001) and Altmetric score and impact factor (r = 0.183, p = 0.025) revealed significant positive correlations. In 2016, two journals were found to have significant correlations between Altmetric score and citation number. Neither year revealed a significant correlation between the age of a journal's Twitter profile and the relationship between Altmetric score and citation count. In each year, Twitter accounted for the highest number of mentions. Conclusion The findings suggest that correlation between Altmetric score and traditional quality metric scores may be increasing. Altmetric score was correlated with impact factor and number of citations in 2016 but not 2013. At this time, Altmetrics are best used as an adjunct that is complementary but not an alternative to traditional bibliometrics for assessing academic productivity and impact.
format	article
author	Zachary C. Wiley Carter J. Boyd Shivani Ananthasekar Nita Bhat Shruthi Harish Bindiganavile Andrew G. Lee
author_facet	Zachary C. Wiley Carter J. Boyd Shivani Ananthasekar Nita Bhat Shruthi Harish Bindiganavile Andrew G. Lee
author_sort	Zachary C. Wiley
title	Examining the Relationship between Altmetric Score and Traditional Bibliometrics in the Ophthalmology Literature for 2013 and 2016 Cohorts
title_short	Examining the Relationship between Altmetric Score and Traditional Bibliometrics in the Ophthalmology Literature for 2013 and 2016 Cohorts
title_full	Examining the Relationship between Altmetric Score and Traditional Bibliometrics in the Ophthalmology Literature for 2013 and 2016 Cohorts
title_fullStr	Examining the Relationship between Altmetric Score and Traditional Bibliometrics in the Ophthalmology Literature for 2013 and 2016 Cohorts
title_full_unstemmed	Examining the Relationship between Altmetric Score and Traditional Bibliometrics in the Ophthalmology Literature for 2013 and 2016 Cohorts
title_sort	examining the relationship between altmetric score and traditional bibliometrics in the ophthalmology literature for 2013 and 2016 cohorts
publisher	Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/040fc01e76d745c7a4ff75e9fc1eacd5
work_keys_str_mv	AT zacharycwiley examiningtherelationshipbetweenaltmetricscoreandtraditionalbibliometricsintheophthalmologyliteraturefor2013and2016cohorts AT carterjboyd examiningtherelationshipbetweenaltmetricscoreandtraditionalbibliometricsintheophthalmologyliteraturefor2013and2016cohorts AT shivaniananthasekar examiningtherelationshipbetweenaltmetricscoreandtraditionalbibliometricsintheophthalmologyliteraturefor2013and2016cohorts AT nitabhat examiningtherelationshipbetweenaltmetricscoreandtraditionalbibliometricsintheophthalmologyliteraturefor2013and2016cohorts AT shruthiharishbindiganavile examiningtherelationshipbetweenaltmetricscoreandtraditionalbibliometricsintheophthalmologyliteraturefor2013and2016cohorts AT andrewglee examiningtherelationshipbetweenaltmetricscoreandtraditionalbibliometricsintheophthalmologyliteraturefor2013and2016cohorts
_version_	1718439557754519552

Examining the Relationship between Altmetric Score and Traditional Bibliometrics in the Ophthalmology Literature for 2013 and 2016 Cohorts

Ejemplares similares