Dissemination of Plastic Surgery Research: An Analysis of and .

UNLABELLED

) 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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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).

CONCLUSIONS

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.