↓ Skip to main content

#MedEd: exploring the relationship between altmetrics and traditional measures of dissemination in health professions education

Overview of attention for article published in Tijdschrift voor Medisch Onderwijs, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
29 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 Mendeley
Title
#MedEd: exploring the relationship between altmetrics and traditional measures of dissemination in health professions education
Published in
Tijdschrift voor Medisch Onderwijs, June 2018
DOI 10.1007/s40037-018-0438-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lauren A. Maggio, Todd C. Leroux, Holly S. Meyer, Anthony R. Artino Jr.

Abstract

Researchers, funders, and institutions are interested in understanding and quantifying research dissemination and impact, particularly related to communicating with the public. Traditionally, citations have been a primary impact measure; however, citations can be slow to accrue and focus on academic use. Recently altmetrics, which track alternate dissemination forms (e. g., social media), have been suggested as a complement to citation-based metrics. This study examines the relationship between altmetrics and traditional measures: journal article citations and access counts. The researchers queried Web of Science and Altmetric Explorer for articles published in HPE journals between 2013-2015. They identified 2,486 articles with altmetrics. Data were analyzed using negative binomial and linear regression models. Blogging was associated with the greatest increase in citations (13% increase), whereas Tweets (1.2%) and Mendeley (1%) were associated with smaller increases. Journal impact factor (JIF) was associated with a 21% increase in citations. Publicly accessible articles were associated with a 19% decrease, but the interactive effect between accessible articles and JIF was associated with a 12% increase. When examining access counts, publicly accessible articles had an increase of 170 access counts whereas blogging was associated with a decrease of 87 accesses. This study suggests that several altmetrics outlets are positively associated with citations, and that public accessibility, holding all other independent variables constant, is positively related to article access. Given the scientific community's evolving focus on dissemination these findings have implications for stakeholders, providing insight into the factors that may improve citations and access of articles.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 94 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Librarian 8 9%
Researcher 8 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Other 7 7%
Other 24 26%
Unknown 31 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 23%
Social Sciences 12 13%
Computer Science 8 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 32 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 September 2020.
All research outputs
#1,703,606
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Tijdschrift voor Medisch Onderwijs
#78
of 574 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,370
of 341,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tijdschrift voor Medisch Onderwijs
#3
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 574 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,509 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.