MHealth: attaining key milestone on the journal’s first impact factor and citation score
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER:
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10643171 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Bibliometric and Altmetric analyses provide different perspectives regarding research impact. This study aimed to determine whether Altmetric score was associated with citation rate independent of established bibliometrics. Citations related to a previous cohort of 100 most cited articles in surgery were collected and a 3-year interval citation gain calculated. Citation count, citation rate index, Altmetric score, 5-year impact factor, and Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine levels were used to estimate citation rate prospect. The median interval citation gain was 161 (i.q.r. 83-281); 74 and 62 articles had an increase in citation rate index (median increase 2.8 (i.q.r. -0.1 to 7.7)) and Altmetric score (median increase 3 (0-4)) respectively. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis revealed that citation rate index (area under the curve (AUC) 0.86, 95 per cent c.i. 0.79 to 0.93; P < 0.001) and Altmetric score (AUC 0.65, 0.55 to 0.76; P = 0.008) were associated with higher interval citation gain. An Altmetric score critical threshold of 2 or more was associated with a better interval citation gain when dichotomized at the interval citation gain median (odds ratio (OR) 4.94, 95 per cent c.i. 1.99 to 12.26; P = 0.001) or upper quartile (OR 4.13, 1.60 to 10.66; P = 0.003). Multivariable analysis revealed only citation rate index to be independently associated with interval citation gain when dichotomized at the median (OR 18.22, 6.70 to 49.55; P < 0.001) or upper quartile (OR 19.30, 4.23 to 88.15; P < 0.001). Citation rate index and Altmetric score appear to be important predictors of interval citation gain, and better at predicting future citations than the historical and established impact factor and Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine quality descriptors.
| S-EPMC7893457 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC2568833 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Neuroscience and molecular biology have been generating large datasets over the past years that are reshaping how research is being conducted. In their wake, open data sharing has been singled out as a major challenge for the future of research. We conducted a comparative study of citations of data publications in both fields, showing that the average publication tagged with a data-related term by the NCBI MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) curators achieves a significantly larger citation impact than the average in either field. We introduce a new metric, the data article citation index (DAC-index), to identify the most prolific authors among those data-related publications. The study is fully reproducible from an executable Rmd (R Markdown) script together with all the citation datasets. We hope these results can encourage authors to more openly publish their data.
| S-EPMC5020078 | biostudies-literature
Project description:It has been suggested that the "visibility" of an article influences its citation count. More specifically, it is believed that the social media can influence article citations.Here we tested the hypothesis that inclusion of scholarly references in Wikipedia affects the citation trends. To perform this analysis, we introduced a citation "propensity" measure, which is inspired by the concept of amino acid propensity for protein secondary structures. We show that although citation counts generally increase during time, the citation "propensity" does not increase after inclusion of a reference in Wikipedia.
| S-EPMC4803015 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8691650 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requires emergency medicine (EM) residency training programs to monitor residents' progress using standardized milestones. The first assessment of PGY 1 resident milestones occurs midway through the first year and could miss initial deficiencies. Early assessment of PGY 1 EM resident milestones has potential to identify at-risk residents prior to standard midyear evaluations. We developed an orientation syllabus for PGY 1 residents followed by a milestone assessment. Assessment scores helped predict future milestone scores and American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) In-Training Examination (ITE) scores for PGY 1 residents.MethodsFrom 2013 to 2020, we developed and implemented Milestone Evaluation Day (MED), a simulation-based day and written exam assessing PGY 1 EM residents during their first month on the 23 ACGME 1.0 milestones. MED stations included a history and physical with verbal presentation, patient simulation, vascular access, wound management, and airway management. MED, Clinical Competency Committee-generated (CCC-generated) milestone, and ABEM ITE scores were averaged and compared utilizing Pearson's correlation coefficient.ResultsOf 112 PGY 1 EM residents, 110 (98%) were analyzed over an 8-year period. We observed a moderate positive correlation of MED and CCC-generated milestone scores (r = .34, p < .001). There was a nonstatistically significant weak positive correlation of MED and ABEM ITE scores (r = .13, p = .17).DiscussionAn early assessment of EM milestones in the PGY 1 year can assist in the prediction of CCC-generated milestone scores for PGY 1 residents.
| S-EPMC10928014 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We sought to determine the correlation between Altmetric Attention Score and traditional bibliometrics in the gynecologic oncology literature. We identified the 10 most-cited gynecologic oncology articles from 5 major gynecology journals and 10 major "oncology" journals that publish on gynecologic oncology during 2014, 2016, and 2018. Article citation count and Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), as well as journal impact factor (IF) and date of Twitter account development were recorded. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to describe the relationship between AAS, tweets, IF, and citation count. While the median citation counts significantly decreased for the top-cited gynecologic oncology articles from 2014 to 2018 (p < 0.001), the corresponding median AAS continuously increased during this period (p = 0.008). For articles published in 2014 and 2018, there was a strong positive relationship between the median citation count and the median AAS (2014: r = 0.92; 2018: r = 0.97), as well as between the IF (r = 0.78 and r = 0.89, respectively); these correlations were moderate to weak in 2016 (r = 0.5 and r = 0.41, respectively). There was a continuously increasing strong positive correlation from 2014 to 2018 between journal IF and median AAS (2014: r = 0.75; 2016: r = 0.82; 2018: r = 0.92). Gynecologic oncology articles published in higher impact journals are associated with increased social media visibility and attention. Our data support the idea that early online attention scores, like the AAS, might be useful for predicting future citation counts for oncology publications in general and gynecologic oncology specifically.
| S-EPMC8138589 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Given the increasing interest and potential use of social media for the promotion of orthopedic literature, there is a need to better understand Altmetrics. Purposes: We sought to determine the relationship between the Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) and the number of citations for articles on total joint arthroplasty (TJA) published in orthopedics journals. We also sought to determine the predictors of greater social media attention for these articles. Methods: Articles on TJA published in Bone and Joint Journal (BJJ), Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS), Clinical Orthopedics and Related Research (CORR), Journal of Arthroplasty, Journal of Knee Surgery, Hip International, and Acta Orthopaedica in 2016 were extracted (n = 498). One-way analysis of variance with Bonferroni corrections was used to compare AAS and citations across journals. Multivariate regressions were used to determine predictors of social media attention and number of citations. Results: The mean AAS and number of citations were 7.5 (range: 0-289) and 16.7 (range: 0-156), respectively. Significant between-group effects were observed according to journal for AAS and number of citations. Publishing an article in JBJS was the strongest predictor of higher number of citations. Publishing an article in BJJ was the only independent predictor of higher AAS, while publishing an article in JBJS or CORR trended toward statistical significance. A higher AAS was a significant predictor of a higher number of citations. Number of citations and number of study references were positive predictors of greater social media attention on Twitter and Facebook. Conclusions: In articles on TJA published in 7 journals in 2016, a higher AAS was a associated with a higher number of citations. Various bibliometric characteristics were found to be significantly associated with greater social media attention; the most common influences were number of citations and number of references. Researchers in orthopedics can use this information when considering how to assess the impact of their work.
| S-EPMC9837400 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionOur aim was to determine if there is a relationship between librarian involvement on a knowledge synthesis project and the synthesis's citation count or the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) of its publication venue.MethodsA total of 551 knowledge syntheses published during a one-year period (2020) from a single category, "Psychology, Clinical", in Clarivate's Journal Citation Reports were exported from Web of Science along with the citation counts for each synthesis and the JIF of its publication venue. The full-text of each article was examined in order to code each as either co-author, acknowledged, or unknown to reflect the level of librarian involvement in the synthesis. The Wilcoxon Rank Sum test on bootstrapped samples was used to determine the significance of the results.ResultsLibrarians were co-authors or acknowledged in 80 (15%) of the syntheses examined. Analyzing two levels of librarian involvement (involved, unknown) indicated no relationship between the level of librarian involvement and the JIF of the journal nor the citation count the synthesis received since publication.DiscussionThere is no evidence of a relationship between librarian involvement in knowledge syntheses and the JIF of the publication or citation count of documents published in journals falling in the JCR category of "Psychology, Clinical" in the year 2020. Repeating this methodology in a different JCR category could help determine whether this lack of a relationship extends beyond the "Psychology, Clinical" category.
| S-EPMC11881647 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThis study aims to identify determinants of high impact, measured by Impact Factor (IF) and Eigenfactor score, among otolaryngology journals.MethodsBibliometric data of "otorhinolaryngology" journals were collected from the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) database. For the years 2009-2020, we collected normalized Eigenfactor score, 5-year IF, immediacy index, fraction of IF from journal-self citation, proportion and magnitude of published citable articles, and total citation counts. High-IF and -Eigenfactor journals were considered those within the top-quartile of that metric each respective year.ResultsHigh-IF and -Eigenfactor otolaryngology journals displayed higher 5-year IFs, immediacy indexes, and IF without self-citation (p < .05 for all years) including total citations counts and citable articles when ranked by Eigenfactor (p < .05 for all years). Otolaryngology IF correlated with 5-year IF and immediacy index within the same year (p < .05 for all years) and from previous years (p < .05 for all years; p < .05 for 2017-2018; p > .05 for 2009-2016). Eigenfactor correlated with 5-year IF, total citation counts, and citable articles within the same year (p < .05 for all years) and previous years (p < .05 for 2013-2018). Multilinear regression revealed that 5-year IF (p < .05 for 2009-2018) and immediacy index from the prior 2 years (p < .05 for 2017-2018; p > .05 for 2009-2016) predicted 2019 IF. Similarly, 5-year IF, total citation counts, and citable articles (p < .05 for 2013-2018) predicted 2019 Eigenfactor score.ConclusionSustained publication of impactful articles is the dominant driver of high IF and Eigenfactor score. Eigenfactor score reflects a unique evaluation of otolaryngology journals; ranking otolaryngology journals by their Eigenfactor scores significantly alters journal ranking compared to ranking by IF.Level of evidenceNA.
| S-EPMC10116985 | biostudies-literature