斜视研究的在线可见性与科学相关性：文献计量分析
Online Visibility and Scientific Relevance of Strabismus Research: Bibliometric Analysis.
作者信息
Stupnicki Aleksander, Suresh Basil, Jain Saurabh
机构信息
University College London Medical School, London, United Kingdom.
Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
出版信息
Interact J Med Res. 2024 Jun 12;13:e50698. doi: 10.2196/50698.
BACKGROUND
Quality and accuracy of online scientific data are crucial, given that the internet and social media serve nowadays as primary sources of medical knowledge.
OBJECTIVE
This study aims to analyze the relationship between scientific relevance and online visibility of strabismus research to answer the following questions: (1) Are the most popular strabismus papers scientifically relevant? (2) Are the most high-impact strabismus studies shared enough online?
METHODS
The Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) was used as a proxy for online visibility, whereas citations and the journal's impact factor (IF) served as a metric for scientific relevance. Using "strabismus" as a keyword, 100 papers with the highest AAS and 100 papers with the highest number of citations were identified. Statistical analyses, including the Spearman rank test, linear regression, and factor analysis, were performed to assess the relationship between AAS, citations, a journal's IF, and mentions across 18 individual Web 2.0 platforms.
RESULTS
A weak, positive, statistically significant correlation was observed between normalized AAS and normalized citations (P<.001; r=0.27) for papers with high visibility. Only Twitter mentions and Mendeley readers correlated significantly with normalized citations (P=.02 and P<.001, respectively) and IF (P=.04 and P=.009, respectively), with Twitter being the strongest significant predictor of citation numbers (r=0.53). For high-impact papers, no correlation was found between normalized citations and normalized AAS (P=.12) or the IF of the journal (P=.55).
CONCLUSIONS
While clinical relevance influences online attention, most high-impact research related to strabismus is not sufficiently shared on the web. Therefore, researchers should make a greater effort to share high-impact papers related to strabismus on online media platforms to improve accessibility and quality of evidence-based knowledge for patients.
背景
鉴于互联网和社交媒体如今已成为医学知识的主要来源，在线科学数据的质量和准确性至关重要。
目的
本研究旨在分析斜视研究的科学相关性与在线可见性之间的关系，以回答以下问题：（1）最受欢迎的斜视论文是否具有科学相关性？（2）最具影响力的斜视研究在网上的分享是否足够？
方法
使用Altmetric关注度得分（AAS）作为在线可见性的代理指标，而引用次数和期刊影响因子（IF）作为科学相关性的衡量指标。以“斜视”为关键词，确定了AAS最高的100篇论文和引用次数最多的100篇论文。进行了包括Spearman秩检验、线性回归和因子分析在内的统计分析，以评估AAS、引用次数、期刊IF以及在18个独立Web 2.0平台上的提及之间的关系。
结果
对于高可见性的论文，标准化AAS与标准化引用次数之间观察到微弱的正相关且具有统计学意义（P<0.001；r=0.27）。只有Twitter提及和Mendeley读者与标准化引用次数（分别为P=0.02和P<0.001）以及IF（分别为P=0.04和P=0.009）显著相关，其中Twitter是引用次数的最强显著预测因子（r=0.53）。对于高影响力的论文，标准化引用次数与标准化AAS（P=0.12）或期刊IF（P=0.55）之间未发现相关性。
结论
虽然临床相关性会影响在线关注度，但大多数与斜视相关的高影响力研究在网络上的分享并不充分。因此，研究人员应更加努力地在在线媒体平台上分享与斜视相关的高影响力论文，以提高患者获取循证知识的便利性和质量。
Zotero 插件