Nasser Jacob S, Billig Jessica I, Horiuchi Sakura, Chung Kevin C
The George Washington School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, D.C.
Section of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Mich.
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2022 Mar 11;10(3):e3808. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000003808. eCollection 2022 Mar.
) recently developed an open access counterpart, ), to increase dissemination of research in an efficient and widespread manner. We aimed to (1) examine the differences in the dissemination of research published in and , and (2) identify differences in the authorship between the journals.
We extracted data on Altmetric Attention Scores, article mentions, citations, and author characteristics using the Altmetric Explorer Database from January 1, 2018, to January 1, 2020. We stratified research outputs into traditional dissemination and social media dissemination. Additionally, multivariable linear regression models were used to examine differences in dissemination between the journals.
A total of 1798 articles were included in the analysis ( = 1031, = 767). The average Altmetric Attention Score was higher for compared with ( = 15.2, = 8.1). Articles in had a greater Altmetric Attention Score (β-coefficient: 7.50, < 0.001), higher measures of traditional dissemination (β-coefficient: 3.11, < 0.001), and higher measures of social media dissemination than articles in (β-coefficient: 4.38, = 0.73).
Despite being an open access journal, had significantly fewer measures of social media and traditional dissemination compared with . Given that numerous factors may influence the dissemination of scientific literature, it is imperative that publications identify specific ways to provide a fair advantage for both researchers and readers. Additional initiatives to engage readership for open access may include creative campaigns targeting an appropriate audience.
（某机构）最近开发了一个开放获取的对应刊物（刊物名称），以高效且广泛地促进研究成果的传播。我们旨在（1）研究在（刊物名称1）和（刊物名称2）上发表的研究在传播方面的差异，以及（2）确定这两种期刊在作者构成上的差异。
我们使用Altmetric Explorer数据库提取了2018年1月1日至2020年1月1日期间的Altmetric关注度得分、文章提及次数、引用次数和作者特征数据。我们将研究成果分为传统传播和社交媒体传播两类。此外，还使用多变量线性回归模型来研究这两种期刊在传播方面的差异。
分析共纳入1798篇文章（刊物名称1 = 1031篇，刊物名称2 = 767篇）。与（刊物名称2）相比，（刊物名称1）的平均Altmetric关注度得分更高（刊物名称1 = 15.2，刊物名称2 = 8.1）。（刊物名称1）上的文章具有更高的Altmetric关注度得分（β系数：7.50，P < 0.001）、更高的传统传播指标（β系数：3.11，P < 0.001），并且在社交媒体传播指标上也高于（刊物名称2）上的文章（β系数：4.38，P = 0.73）。
尽管（刊物名称2）是一本开放获取期刊，但与（刊物名称1）相比，其在社交媒体和传统传播方面的指标明显较少。鉴于众多因素可能影响科学文献的传播，出版物必须确定具体方法，为研究人员和读者提供公平的优势。吸引开放获取读者的其他举措可能包括针对合适受众开展有创意的活动。
