Independent Research Scientist, Founder of Dental Hypotheses, Isfahan, Iran.
Department of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran.
Biomed Res Int. 2021 Apr 7;2021:6680764. doi: 10.1155/2021/6680764. eCollection 2021.
In recent years, several controversial reports of the correlation between altmetric score and citations have been published (range: -0.2 to 0.8). We conducted a meta-analysis to provide an in-depth statistical analysis of the correlation between altmetric score and number of citations in the field of health sciences.
Three online databases (Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed) were systematically searched, without language restrictions, from the earliest publication date available through February 29, 2020, using the keywords "altmetric," "citation," and "correlation." Grey literature was also searched via WorldCat, Open Grey, and Google Scholar (first 100 hits only). All studies in the field of health sciences that reported on this correlation were included. Effect sizes were calculated using Fisher's transformation of correlations. Subgroup analyses based on citation source and sampling methods were performed.
From 27 included articles, 8 articles comprise several independent studies. The total sample size was 9,943 articles comprised of 35 studies. The overall pooled effect size was 0.19 (95% confidence interval 0.13 to 0.26). Bivariate partial prediction of interaction between effect size, citation source, and sampling method showed a greater effect size with Web of Science compared with Scopus and Dimensions. Egger's regression showed a marginally nonsignificant publication bias ( = 0.055), and trim-and-fill analysis estimated one missing study in this meta-analysis.
In health sciences, currently altmetric score has a positive but weak correlation with number of citations (pooled correlation = 0.19, 95% C.I 0.12 to 0.25). We emphasize on future examinations to assess changes of correlation pattern between altmetric score and citations over time.
近年来，已有数篇关于 altmetric 分数与引文相关性的争议性报告发表（范围为-0.2 至 0.8）。我们进行了一项荟萃分析，以对健康科学领域的 altmetric 分数与引文数量之间的相关性进行深入的统计分析。
系统检索了三个在线数据库（Web of Science、Scopus 和 PubMed），无语言限制，检索时间从最早的可获得出版物日期至 2020 年 2 月 29 日，使用的关键词为“altmetric”、“citation”和“correlation”。还通过 WorldCat、Open Grey 和 Google Scholar（仅前 100 个命中结果）检索灰色文献。纳入了所有报告该相关性的健康科学领域的研究。使用 Fisher 转换计算相关系数的效应量。根据引文来源和抽样方法进行亚组分析。
27 篇纳入的文章中，有 8 篇文章包含多个独立研究。总样本量为 9943 篇文章，包含 35 项研究。总体汇总效应量为 0.19（95%置信区间 0.13 至 0.26）。双变量预测分析显示，与 Scopus 和 Dimensions 相比，Web of Science 的效应量更大。Egger 回归显示，存在边缘非显著的发表偏倚（=0.055），trim-and-fill 分析估计在这项荟萃分析中缺失了一项研究。
在健康科学领域，目前 altmetric 分数与引文数量呈正相关，但相关性较弱（汇总相关系数=0.19，95%置信区间 0.12 至 0.25）。我们强调未来的研究需要评估随着时间的推移，altmetric 分数与引文之间的相关性模式的变化。
