Abstract | March 2, 2021
Altmetric Attention Score: Evaluating the Social Media Impact of Burn Research
Learning Objectives
- Recognize the role of the Altmetric Attention Score in measuring social media impact of burn articles;
- Consider the use of both the Altmetric Attention Score and traditional bibliometrics (i.e., citation rate, impact factor) to assess article impact.
Background: Traditional measures of scholarly impact (i.e., impact factor, citation rate) do not account for the role of social media in knowledge dissemination. The Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) tracks the online sharing activity of articles on platforms such as Twitter and Facebook. We sought to better understand which manuscript characteristics are associated with a higher AAS in two high impact burn journals.
Methods: All original scientific articles published in (1) Journal of Burn Care & Research and (2) Burns from January to December 2017 were obtained from official journal websites. Article characteristics extracted include: AAS; number of Twitter, Facebook, and news outlet mentions; subject of study and study design; number of citations and references; and number of authors and academic institutions. Spearman’s Rho correlation coefficient was used to determine correlation between citation count and AAS. A multivariable linear regression was used to identify manuscript characteristics associated with AAS. Significance was set to p<0.05..
Results: A total of 285 manuscripts were included in the analysis. The average AAS for all manuscripts was 6.1 (SD: 48; Range: 0 to 611) in which 156 (55%) of those had Twitter mentions. The mean AAS for Journal of Burn Care & Research and Burns were 7.7 (SD: 54; Range: 0 to 536) and 5.3 (SD: 45; Range: 0 to 611), respectively. There was a weak, positive correlation between AAS and citation count for all manuscripts (ρ = 0.12; p=0.049), and this finding was consistent for Journal of Burn Care & Research (ρ = 0.21; p=0.039) and Burns (ρ = 0.15; p=0.038) individually. Studies discussing skin grafts were associated with higher average AAS (β: 29 [95% CI: 4.2 to 54]; p=0.022). No manuscript characteristics were associated with lower AAS.
Conclusions: When evaluating 285 manuscripts in the 2017 volumes of Journal of Burn Care & Research and Burns, there was a weak, positive correlation between AAS and citation count. This suggests that AAS and citation count measure different areas of impact. Therefore, our findings support using both AAS and traditional bibliometrics to assess article impact. Further, research on skin grafts was associated with higher AAS.
References and Resources
- Butler JS, Sebastian AS, Kaye ID, et al. Understanding Traditional Research Impact Metrics. Clin Spine Surg. 2017. doi:10.1097/BSD.0000000000000530.
- Seglen PO. Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. Br Med J. 1997. doi:10.1136/bmj.314.7079.497.
- Trueger NS, Thoma B, Hsu CH, et al. The altmetric score: A new measure for article-level dissemination and impact. Ann Emerg Med. 2015. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.04.022.
- Amath A, Ambacher K, Leddy JJ, et al. Comparing alternative and traditional dissemination metrics in medical education. Med Educ. 2017. doi:10.1111/medu.13359.
- What are Altmetrics? https://www.altmetric.com/about-altmetrics/what-are-altmetrics/.
- The donut and Altmetric Attention Score. https://www.altmetric.com/about-our-data/the-donut-and-score/.
- Zhou JZ, Lemelman BT, Done N, et al. Social media and the dissemination of research: Insights from the most widely circulated articles in plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000004598.
