Analysis of Alternative Metrics of Research Impact: A Correlation Comparison between Altmetric Attention Scores and Traditional Bibliometrics among Plastic Surgery Research.
Journal
Plastic and reconstructive surgery
ISSN: 1529-4242
Titre abrégé: Plast Reconstr Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 1306050
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2020
11 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
28
8
2020
medline:
16
12
2020
entrez:
28
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Scholarly output has typically been measured by citation-based metrics such as the Hirsch index (h-index). The Altmetric Attention Score has emerged as a substitute to measure digital attention given to a project. This study aims to determine whether there is any correlation between h-index and the Altmetric score in the plastic surgery literature. Article metrics (full-text views, abstract views, PDF downloads, times e-mailed, Altmetric Attention Score, times tweeted, and number of citations by posts) were extracted from articles published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery over a 2-year period. Author metrics, including h5-index, were also collected. Pairwise correlations were performed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (r). A total of 1668 articles were published, with 971 included. Altmetric Attention Scores showed strong correlation with other article metrics (r = 0.48 to 0.97; p < 0.001) but weak correlation with h5-index (r = 0.14; p < 0.001) and sum of times cited without self-citation (r = 0.14; p < 0.001). It did not correlate with total publications, average citations per item, or sum of times cited. The h5-indexes showed strong positive correlation with other author bibliometrics (r = 0.66 to 0.97; p < 0.001); moderate correlation with times e-mailed (r = 0.41; p < 0.001); weak correlation with number of citations by posts (r = 0.10; p = 0.002); and no correlation with full-text views, abstract views, PDF downloads, and times tweeted. The Altmetric Attention Score and conventional senior author bibliometrics have weak positive correlation at best and appear to have distinct but complementary roles in measuring scholarly output.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Scholarly output has typically been measured by citation-based metrics such as the Hirsch index (h-index). The Altmetric Attention Score has emerged as a substitute to measure digital attention given to a project. This study aims to determine whether there is any correlation between h-index and the Altmetric score in the plastic surgery literature.
METHODS
Article metrics (full-text views, abstract views, PDF downloads, times e-mailed, Altmetric Attention Score, times tweeted, and number of citations by posts) were extracted from articles published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery over a 2-year period. Author metrics, including h5-index, were also collected. Pairwise correlations were performed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (r).
RESULTS
A total of 1668 articles were published, with 971 included. Altmetric Attention Scores showed strong correlation with other article metrics (r = 0.48 to 0.97; p < 0.001) but weak correlation with h5-index (r = 0.14; p < 0.001) and sum of times cited without self-citation (r = 0.14; p < 0.001). It did not correlate with total publications, average citations per item, or sum of times cited. The h5-indexes showed strong positive correlation with other author bibliometrics (r = 0.66 to 0.97; p < 0.001); moderate correlation with times e-mailed (r = 0.41; p < 0.001); weak correlation with number of citations by posts (r = 0.10; p = 0.002); and no correlation with full-text views, abstract views, PDF downloads, and times tweeted.
CONCLUSION
The Altmetric Attention Score and conventional senior author bibliometrics have weak positive correlation at best and appear to have distinct but complementary roles in measuring scholarly output.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32852470
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000007270
pii: 00006534-202011000-00050
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
664e-670eCommentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Références
Hirsch JE. An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102:16569–16572.
Bartneck C, Kokkelmans S. Detecting h-index manipulation through self-citation analysis. Scientometrics. 2011;87:85–98.
Bornmann L, Mutz R, Daniel HD. Are there better indices for evaluation purposes than the h index? A comparison of nine different variants of the h index using data from biomedicine. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2008;59:830–837.
Yong A. Critique of Hirsch’s citation index: A combinatorial Fermi problem. Not Am Math Soc. 2014;61:1040–1050.
Altmetric Support. How is the Altmetric Attention Score calculated? Available at: https://help.altmetric.com/support/solutions/articles/6000060969-how-is-the-altmetric-attention-score-calculated-. Accessed November 12, 2019
Altmetric. Altmetric for researchers: Track and demonstrate the reach and influence of your work to key stakeholders. Available at: https://www.altmetric.com/audience/researchers/. Accessed September 22, 2019
Branford OA, Kamali P, Rohrich RJ, et al. #PlasticSurgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;138:1354–1365.
Humphries LS, Curl B, Song DH. #SocialMedia for the academic plastic surgeon: Elevating the brand. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2016;4:e599.
Schober P, Boer C, Schwarte LA. Correlation coefficients: Appropriate use and interpretation. Anesth Analg. 2018;126:1763–1768.
Ruan QZ, Chen AD, Cohen JB, Singhal D, Lin SJ, Lee BT. Alternative metrics of scholarly output: The relationship among Altmetric Score, Mendeley Reader Score, citations, and downloads in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;141:801–809.
Swanson EW, Miller DT, Susarla SM, et al. What effect does self-citation have on bibliometric measures in academic plastic surgery? Ann Plast Surg. 2016;77:350–353.
Barnes C. The emperor’s new clothes: The h-index as a guide to resource allocation in higher education. J Higher Educ Policy Manag. 2014;36:456–470.
Eysenbach G. Can tweets predict citations? Metrics of social impact based on Twitter and correlation with traditional metrics of scientific impact. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13:e123.