From the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery (Zhang, Blazar, Kilgallen, and Earp), Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, and the Harvard Medical School (Zhang, Blazar, and Earp), Boston, MA.
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2021 Dec 1;29(23):e1239-e1245. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-20-01074.
INTRODUCTION: The academic impact of open access publications compared with conventional publications in orthopaedic surgery is not well described. The primary objective of this study was to compare the number of academic citations and social media posts between recent conventional and open access publications in orthopaedic surgery. Secondary objectives of this study were (1) to determine the correlation between academic citations and social media posts and (2) to study the trend of academic citations and social media posts over time. METHODS: An internet-based study was performed on 3,720 articles from five high-impact orthopaedic journals and their associated open access journals from March 2017 to February 2019, including 2,929 conventional and 791 open access journal publications. Academic citations were quantified using Google Scholar and Web of Science, and social media mentions using Twitter. The Mann-Whitney U test was used for comparisons of nonparametric data, and the Spearman rank correlation coefficient was calculated for correlations. RESULTS: The average number of academic citations per article was 10.1 on Google Scholar and 6.0 on Web of Science. The average number of Twitter posts per article was 1.6. Conventional publications had markedly more citations than open access publications on Google Scholar and Web of Science. Open access publications had markedly more Twitter posts, but the effect size was small and unimportant. Academic citations were weakly correlated with social media posts. On average, orthopaedic publications accrue 7.4 citations per year on Google Scholar and 4.6 citations per year on Web of Science. DISCUSSION: Our findings support a citation advantage to conventional publication. Publications in open access journals are cited less frequently and less rapidly compared with those in conventional journals. The use of social media for orthopaedic research is effectively equivalent between conventional and open access journals and continues to grow. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.
引言:开放获取出版物与骨科手术中的传统出版物相比,其学术影响力尚未得到充分描述。本研究的主要目的是比较骨科手术中近期传统出版物和开放获取出版物的学术引用数量和社交媒体文章发布量。本研究的次要目的包括:(1)确定学术引用与社交媒体文章发布之间的相关性;(2)研究学术引用与社交媒体文章发布随时间的变化趋势。
方法:本研究为基于互联网的研究,分析了 2017 年 3 月至 2019 年 2 月期间来自 5 种高影响力骨科期刊及其相关开放获取期刊的 3720 篇文章,其中包括 2929 篇传统期刊出版物和 791 篇开放获取期刊出版物。使用 Google Scholar 和 Web of Science 对学术引用进行量化,使用 Twitter 对社交媒体文章发布进行量化。采用 Mann-Whitney U 检验对非参数数据进行比较,采用 Spearman 秩相关系数对相关性进行计算。
结果:平均每篇文章在 Google Scholar 上的学术引用量为 10.1 次,在 Web of Science 上为 6.0 次。平均每篇文章的 Twitter 文章发布量为 1.6 次。Google Scholar 和 Web of Science 上,传统出版物的引用量明显多于开放获取出版物。开放获取出版物的 Twitter 文章发布量明显更多,但效应量小且不重要。学术引用与社交媒体文章发布量呈弱相关。平均而言,骨科出版物每年在 Google Scholar 上获得 7.4 次引用,每年在 Web of Science 上获得 4.6 次引用。
讨论:我们的研究结果支持传统出版具有引用优势。与传统期刊相比,开放获取期刊的出版物被引用的频率和速度都较低。社交媒体在骨科研究中的使用在传统和开放获取期刊中效果相当,并且还在不断增加。
证据等级:无。
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2021-12-1
J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev. 2020-9
Clin Orthop Surg. 2021-12
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2022-7
J Pediatr Soc North Am. 2024-7-15
Turk J Surg. 2024-6-28