The Online Attention to Otorhinolaryngology Research: An Altmetric Analysis (1967-2021)
Journal of Otorhinolaryngology and Facial Plastic Surgery,
Vol. 8 No. 1 (2022),
25 January 2022
,
Page 1-14
https://doi.org/10.22037/orlfps.v8i1.38911
Abstract
Background: As a new approach and complementary to traditional bibliometrics, altmetrics measures the influence of scientific research in social media tools and applications.
Aim: This study aimed at comprehensively analyzing research output in otorhinolaryngology research from its beginning in 1967 to 2021.
Methods: Using Scimago Journal Ranking (SJR), 107 otorhinolaryngology journals were retrieved. Of them, 84 journals with their 89044 papers as well as their altmetric scores were extracted from the Altmetric Explorer in 28 February 2022. The citation rates of the top ten papers having high altmetric scores were retrieved from Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science and Dimensions. Data were analyzed in excel.
Results: 67,529 otorhinolaryngology papers (75%) were mentioned 2,901,187 times in 17 different social media tools. The highest altmetric score of papers amounted to 3,989. The top-ranked media were Nendeley and Twitter, respectively. The USA was the first ranked country in Twitter and Facebook and the UK was such in News Outlet and Policy. The highest mentioned journal was JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery. The top affiliation in sharing papers was Harvard University with 1621 shared papers. All of the top 10 papers in altmetric scores were multi-authored original research articles..
Conclusion: As one of the first altmetric studies in otorhinolaryngology field, this study provided helpful information for potential authors, researchers, research institutes and journals in the field in increasing the reach and influence of their researches.
- Otorhinolaryngology; Altmetrics; Altmetric attention score; Social media; Highly-mentioned papers; SCImago journal ranking.
How to Cite
References
2. Edmond Jr CV, Wiet GJ, Bolger LB. Virtual environments: Surgical simulation in otolaryngology. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America. 1998;31(2):369-81.
3. Aslıer NGY, Aslıer M. The Bibliometric Aspects of Case Report/Series in Science Citation Index Otorhinolaryngology Journals. Turkish Archives of Otorhinolaryngology. 2021;59(3):193.
4. Gunn W. Social signals reflect academic impact: What it means when a scholar adds a paper to Mendeley. Information standards quarterly. 2013;25(2):33-9.
5. Piwowar H, Priem J. The power of altmetrics on a CV. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2013;39(4):10-3.
6. Priem J, Taraborelli D, Groth P, Neylon C. Altmetrics: A manifesto. 2011.
7. Sud P, Thelwall M. Evaluating altmetrics. Scientometrics. 2014;98(2):1131-43.
8. Nocera AP, Boyd CJ, Boudreau H, Hakim O, Rais-Bahrami S. Examining the correlation between altmetric score and citations in the urology literature. Urology. 2019;134:45-50.
9. Priem J, Costello KL. How and why scholars cite on Twitter. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2010;47(1):1-4.
10. Brigham TJ. An introduction to altmetrics. Medical reference services quarterly. 2014;33(4):438-47.
11. Mohammadi E, Thelwall M, Haustein S, Larivière V. Who reads research articles? An altmetrics analysis of M endeley user categories. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 2015;66(9):1832-46.
12. Wang J. Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation. Scientometrics. 2013;94(3):851-72.
13. Haustein S. 17 Readership Metrics. Beyond bibliometrics: Harnessing multidimensional indicators of scholarly impact. 2014:327.
14. Bornmann L, Daniel HD. What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of documentation. 2008;64(1):45–80.
15. Fausto S, Machado FA, Bento LFJ, Iamarino A, Nahas TR, Munger DS. Research blogging: indexing and registering the change in science 2.0. PloS one. 2012;7(12):e50109.
16. Haustein S, Peters I, Bar-Ilan J, Priem J, Shema H, Terliesner J. Coverage and adoption of altmetrics sources in the bibliometric community. Scientometrics. 2014;101(2):1145-63.
17. Taylor M. Exploring the boundaries: How altmetrics can expand our vision of scholarly communication and social impact. Information standards quarterly. 2013;25(2):27-32.
18. Eysenbach G. Can tweets predict citations? Metrics of social impact based on Twitter and correlation with traditional metrics of scientific impact. Journal of medical Internet research. 2011;13(4):e2012.
19. Haustein S, Larivière V, Thelwall M, Amyot D, Peters I. Tweets vs. Mendeley readers: How do these two social media metrics differ? IT-Information technology. 2014;56(5):207-15.
20. Mohammadi E, Thelwall M, Kousha K. Can M endeley bookmarks reflect readership? A survey of user motivations. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 2016;67(5):1198-209.
21. Shema H, Bar‐Ilan J, Thelwall M. How is research blogged? A content analysis approach. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 2015;66(6):1136-49.
22. Thelwall M. Are Mendeley reader counts useful impact indicators in all fields? Scientometrics. 2017;113(3):1721-31.
23. Wang X, Mao W, Xu S, Zhang C. Usage history of scientific literature: Nature metrics and metrics of Nature publications. Scientometrics. 2014;98(3):1923-33.
24. Zahedi Z, Costas R, Wouters P. How well developed are altmetrics? A cross-disciplinary analysis of the presence of ‘alternative metrics’ in scientific publications. Scientometrics. 2014;101(2):1491-513.
25. Chang J, Desai N, Gosain A. Correlation between altmetric score and citations in pediatric surgery core journals. Journal of Surgical Research. 2019;243:52-8.
26. Elmore SA. The Altmetric attention score: what does it mean and why should I care? : SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA; 2018. p. 252-5.
27. Huang W, Wang P, Wu Q. A correlation comparison between Altmetric Attention Scores and citations for six PLOS journals. PloS one. 2018;13(4):e0194962.
28. Lamba M. Research productivity of health care policy faculty: a cohort study of Harvard Medical School. Scientometrics. 2020;124(1):107-30.
29. Liu CL, Xu YQ, Wu H, Chen SS, Guo JJ. Correlation and interaction visualization of altmetric indicators extracted from scholarly social network activities: dimensions and structure. Journal of medical internet research. 2013;15(11):e2707.
30. Haustein S, Costas R, Larivière V. Characterizing social media metrics of scholarly papers: The effect of document properties and collaboration patterns. PloS one. 2015;10(3):e0120495.
31. Melero R. Altmetrics–a complement to conventional metrics. Biochemia medica. 2015;25(2):152-60.
32. Javitt MC. Section editor's notebook: impact factor—an analog metric in a digital world. Am Roentgen Ray Soc; 2015. p. 1153-4.
33. Trueger NS, Thoma B, Hsu CH, Sullivan D, Peters L, Lin M. The altmetric score: a new measure for article-level dissemination and impact. Annals of emergency medicine. 2015;66(5):549-53.
34. Dardas LA, Woodward A, Scott J, Xu H, Sawair FA. Measuring the social impact of nursing research: An insight into altmetrics. Journal of advanced nursing. 2019;75(7):1394-405.
35. Ramamurti P, Gu A, Fassihi SC, Stake S, Wei C, Campbell J, et al. Correlation Between Altmetric Score and Traditional Bibliometrics in Total Joint Arthroplasty Research. Arthroplasty today. 2021;7:225-9.
36. Parrish JM, Jenkins NW, Brundage TS, Hrynewycz NM, Singh K. The top 100 spine surgery articles on social media: An Altmetric study. Spine. 2020;45(17):1229-38.
37. Rosenkrantz AB, Ayoola A, Singh K, Duszak Jr R. Alternative metrics (“Altmetrics”) for assessing article impact in popular general radiology journals. Academic radiology. 2017;24(7):891-7.
38. Wang J, Alotaibi NM, Ibrahim GM, Kulkarni AV, Lozano AM. The spectrum of altmetrics in neurosurgery: the top 100 “trending” articles in neurosurgical journals. World neurosurgery. 2017;103:883-95. e1.
39. 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. Plastic and reconstructive surgery. 2018;141(3):801-9.
40. Barakat AF, Nimri N, Shokr M, Mahtta D, Mansoor H, Masri A, et al. Correlation of altmetric attention score and citations for high-impact general medicine journals: a cross-sectional study. Journal of general internal medicine. 2019;34(6):825-7.
41. Barbic D, Tubman M, Lam H, Barbic S. An analysis of altmetrics in emergency medicine. Academic Emergency Medicine. 2016;23(3):251-68.
42. Saunders T, Rymer B, McNamara K. A global bibliometric analysis of otolaryngology: Head and neck surgery literature. Clinical Otolaryngology. 2017;42(6):1338-42.
43. Cimmino MA, Maio T, Ugolini D, Borasi F, Mela GS. Trends in otolaryngology research during the period 1995–2000: a bibliometric approach. Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. 2005;132(2):295-302.
44. Thangamathesvaran L, M. Patel N, Siddiqui SH, Singh R, Wayne Jr R, Kılıç S, et al. The Otolaryngology Match: A Bibliometric Analysis of 222 First‐Year Residents. The Laryngoscope. 2019;129(7):1561-6.
45. Sun GH. Bibliometric analysis of health services research in otolaryngology journals. Otolaryngology--Head and Neck Surgery. 2012;147(5):841-7.
46. Roy D, Hughes J, Jones A, Fenton J. Citation analysis of otorhinolaryngology journals. The Journal of Laryngology & Otology. 2002;116(5):363-6.
47. SCImago. SCImago Journal & Country Rank 2022 [Available from: https://www.scimagojr.com/aboutus.php.
48. Galligan F, Dyas-Correia S. Altmetrics: rethinking the way we measure. Serials review. 2013;39(1):56-61.
49. Altmetric. The donut and Altmetric Attention Score. 2022. [Available from: https://www.altmetric.com/about-our-data/the-donut-and-score/.
50. Ortega JL. Reliability and accuracy of altmetric providers: a comparison among Altmetric. com, PlumX and Crossref Event Data. Scientometrics. 2018;116(3):2123-38.
51. Baessa M, Lery T, Grenz D, Vijayakumar J. Connecting the pieces: Using ORCIDs to improve research impact and repositories. F1000Research. 2015;4.
52. Kolahi J, Khazaei S. Altmetric: Top 50 dental articles in 2014. British dental journal. 2016;220(11):569-74.
53. Robinson-García N, Torres-Salinas D, Zahedi Z, Costas R. New data, new possibilities: Exploring the insides of Altmetric. com. arXiv preprint arXiv:14080135. 2014.
54. Xia F, Su X, Wang W, Zhang C, Ning Z, Lee I. Bibliographic analysis of Nature based on Twitter and Facebook altmetrics data. PloS one. 2016;11(12):e0165997.
55. Hassan S-U, Gillani UA. Altmetrics of" altmetrics" using Google Scholar, Twitter, Mendeley, Facebook, Google-plus, CiteULike, Blogs and Wiki. arXiv preprint arXiv:160307992. 2016.
56. Araújo RF, Murakami TR, de Lara JL, Fausto S, editors. Does the Global South Have Altmetrics? Analyzing a Brazilian LIS Journal. ISSI; 2015.
57. Torres-Salinas D, Robinson-García N, Jiménez-Contreras E. Can we use altmetrics at the institutional level? A case study analysing the coverage by research areas of four Spanish universities. arXiv preprint arXiv:160600232. 2016.
58. Bakkalbasi N, Bauer K, Glover J, Wang L. Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Biomedical digital libraries. 2006;3(1):1-8.
59. Saberi MK, Mokhtari H, Ouchi A, Vakilimofrad H. An Altmetrics Analysis of the Articles Published in the Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran (1987-2020). Medical Journal of The Islamic Republic of Iran (MJIRI). 2021;35(1):1296-305.
60. Costas R, Zahedi Z, Wouters P. Do “altmetrics” correlate with citations? Extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 2015;66(10):2003-19.
61. Holmberg KJ. Altmetrics for information professionals: Past, present and future: Chandos Publishing; 2015.
62. Nuredini K, Peters I, editors. Enriching the knowledge of altmetrics studies by exploring social media metrics for Economic and Business Studies journals. Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators (STI Conference 2016), València (Spain), September 14-16, 2016; 2016: Berlin: European Network of Indicator Designers (ENID).
63. Rowlands I, Nicholas D, Russell B, Canty N, Watkinson A. Social media use in the research workflow. Learned Publishing. 2011;24(3):183-95.
64. Ouchi A, Saberi MK, Ansari N, Hashempour L, Isfandyari-Moghaddam A. Do altmetrics correlate with citations? A study based on the 1,000 most-cited articles. Information Discovery and Delivery. 2019.
65. Kolahi J, Iranmanesh P, Khazaei S. Altmetric analysis of 2015 dental literature: a cross sectional survey. British dental journal. 2017;222(9):695-9.
66. Hammarfelt B. Using altmetrics for assessing research impact in the humanities. Scientometrics. 2014;101(2):1419-30.
67. Priem J, Hemminger BH. Scientometrics 2.0: New metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web. First monday. 2010.
68. Hassona Y, Qutachi T, Dardas L, Alrashdan MS, Sawair F. The online attention to oral cancer research: An Altmetric analysis. Oral Diseases. 2019;25(6):1502-10.
69. Yu H, Murat B, Li L, Xiao T. How accurate are Twitter and Facebook altmetrics data? A comparative content analysis. Scientometrics. 2021;126(5):4437-63.
- Abstract Viewed: 108 times
- PDF Downloaded: 130 times