Office of Medical Education, Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, State College, Pa.
Department of Public Health Sciences, Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, State College, Pa.
J Vasc Surg. 2021 Mar;73(3):1096-1103. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2020.09.029. Epub 2020 Oct 17.
The past two decades have seen a vast expansion of social media in all aspects of our lives. Scholars and journals are steadily increasing their social media presence to reach a wider audience. We compared the social media mentions (SMs) of vascular surgery publications and their effect on the literature citations (LCs) for them.
A total of 169 articles from three renowned vascular surgery journals (Journal of Vascular Surgery [JVS], Annals of Vascular Surgery, and European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery) in October 2016 were collected. All three journals are published by the same publisher (Elsevier). SMs were tracked using Altmetric Bookmarklet for Twitter and Facebook mentions. The LCs were evaluated using Scopus and Google Scholar. The number of citations was compared between those with and without any SMs and among the three journals using nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis tests. The proportion of articles with SMs was compared among the three journals using a χ test. The relationship between the numbers of SMs and LCs was assessed using the Spearman rank correlation coefficient and reported as 95% confidence intervals. Statistical significance was assigned at P < .05.
Of the 169 articles examined, 51 (30.2%) had a presence regarding social media usage. JVS has both Twitter and Facebook presence. The Annals of Vascular Surgery and European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery only have Twitter accounts. JVS had the highest total number of citations, number of LCs per manuscript, and SMs per manuscript. A significant difference was found in the median, Q1 (median of the lower half of the data), and Q3 (median of the upper half of the data) number of total Google citations between those articles with and without SMs (median, 8.0; Q1, 3.0; Q3, 17.0; vs median, 3.0; Q1, 0.0; Q3, 8.0, respectively; Kruskal-Wallis P < .001). Similarly, a significant difference was found in the median number of total Scopus citations between those articles with and without SMs (median, 5.0; Q1, 2.0; Q3, 13.0 vs median, 2.0; Q1, 0.0; Q3, 6.0, respectively; Kruskal-Wallis P < .001). Articles with a SM showed a 2.7- fold increase in median total citations in Google and a 2.5-fold increase in median total citations in Scopus. The Spearman correlation coefficients to determine the relationship between the absolute number of SMs and LCs revealed a positive, but weak, correlation, largely driven by the majority of articles with no SMs. The difference in the median number of citations among the three journals was not statistically significant, either by Google (P = .22) or Scopus (P = .08), nor was the difference in the proportion of articles with SMs among the journals statistically significant (P = .36).
The presence of SMs for vascular surgery publications, especially clinical science articles, was associated with a significantly increased number of median LCs during the 3 years after publication. The three journals did not differ with respect to the median number of citations or proportion of articles with SMs.
在我们生活的方方面面,社交媒体在过去二十年中都得到了极大的扩展。学者和期刊都在稳步增加其社交媒体的影响力,以覆盖更广泛的受众。我们比较了血管外科学术出版物的社交媒体提及量(SM)及其对文献引用量(LC)的影响。
我们于 2016 年 10 月收集了三个著名的血管外科学期刊(《血管外科学杂志》[JVS]、《血管外科学年鉴》和《欧洲血管和腔内外科学杂志》)的 169 篇文章。这三个期刊均由同一家出版商(爱思唯尔)出版。使用 Altmetric Bookmarklet 跟踪 Twitter 和 Facebook 提及量。使用 Scopus 和 Google Scholar 评估 LC。使用非参数 Kruskal-Wallis 检验比较有无 SM 的文章的 LC 数量,并比较三个期刊之间的 LC 数量。使用卡方检验比较三个期刊之间的 SM 出现比例。使用 Spearman 秩相关系数评估 SM 数量与 LC 数量之间的关系,并报告 95%置信区间。P<0.05 被认为具有统计学意义。
在检查的 169 篇文章中,有 51 篇(30.2%)有关于社交媒体使用的信息。JVS 同时具有 Twitter 和 Facebook 账号。《血管外科学年鉴》和《欧洲血管和腔内外科学杂志》只有 Twitter 账号。JVS 的总引用量、每篇手稿的 LC 数量和每篇手稿的 SM 数量均最高。有和无 SM 的文章的总 Google 引用量的中位数、Q1(数据下半部分的中位数)和 Q3(数据上半部分的中位数)之间存在显著差异(中位数,8.0;Q1,3.0;Q3,17.0;中位数,3.0;Q1,0.0;Q3,8.0;Kruskal-Wallis P<0.001)。同样,有和无 SM 的文章的总 Scopus 引用量的中位数也存在显著差异(中位数,5.0;Q1,2.0;Q3,13.0;中位数,2.0;Q1,0.0;Q3,6.0;Kruskal-Wallis P<0.001)。有 SM 的文章的 Google 总引用量中位数增加了 2.7 倍,Scopus 总引用量中位数增加了 2.5 倍。确定 SM 绝对数量与 LC 之间关系的 Spearman 相关系数显示出正相关,但相关性较弱,主要是因为大多数文章没有 SM。三个期刊的 Google(P=0.22)或 Scopus(P=0.08)的 LC 中位数差异均无统计学意义,期刊中具有 SM 的文章比例差异也无统计学意义(P=0.36)。
血管外科学术出版物(尤其是临床科学文章)的 SM 存在与发表后 3 年内的 LC 中位数显著增加有关。这三个期刊在引用量中位数或具有 SM 的文章比例方面没有差异。