A Study of the Relationship between High X (Twitter) Mentions and Citation Counts in the Field of Telemedicine: A Co-relational Analysis
Keywords:
Altmetric, Citation counts, Dimensions, Social Networking Site, Telemedicine, TwitterAbstract
In the “X” (formerly Twitter) platform, people share information and express their views, reviews, likes, dislikes and findings through tweets and retweets. In the scientific community, sharing new findings is a trend on X to reach maximum visibility among peers. The discussion on X could be a critical source for finding research gaps for further study. This study aims to analyze the influence of X mentions on citation counts. The selected topic, "Telemedicine", played an essential role during the COVID-19 pandemic when social distancing was mandatory. During that period, social media was the most effective way of scientific discussion. The five most relevant keywords in the title were used to extract data from Altmetrics explorer. The data of the first top 50 X mentions of papers were downloaded for each keyword for the study. After the removal of duplicate entries, a data set of 245 unique papers was considered for the study. The finding revealed a positive correlation between high X mentions and Dimension® citation counts. The p-value is 0.013 (for 245 papers) signifies the positive co-relation and the influence of X mentions has only a 2.5% increase in citation counts. The study indicates that there is a positive correlation between X mentions and citation count, but it is not conclusive that X mentions are not the only cause of high citations. The researchers may use X to promote their publications for greater visibility which will help to attract more citations.
Keywords: Altmetric, Citation counts; Dimensions, Social Networking Site, Telemedicine, Twitter, X.
Downloads
References
Bar-Ilan, J., Haustein, S., Peters, I., Priem, J., Shema, H., & Terliesner, J. (2012). Beyond citations: Scholars’ visibility on the social Web (arXiv:1205.5611). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1205.5611
Betz, K., Knuf, F., Duncker, D., Giordano, M., Dobrev, D., & Linz, D. (2021). The impact of X promotion on future citation rates: The #TweetTheJournal study. International Journal of Cardiology. Heart & Vasculature, 33, 100776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcha.2021.100776
Bornmann, L. (2014). Do altmetrics point to the broader impact of research? An overview of benefits and disadvantages of altmetrics | Elsevier Enhanced Reader. Journal of Informetrics, 8, 895–903. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2014.09.005
Costas, R., Zahedi, Z., & Wouters, P. (2015). Do “altmetrics” correlate with citations? Extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(10), 2003–2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23309
Fenner, M. (2013). What Can Article-Level Metrics Do for You? PLOS Biology, 11(10), e1001687. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001687
Haustein, S., Peters, I., Sugimoto, C. R., Thelwall, M., & Larivière, V. (2014). Tweeting biomedicine: An analysis of tweets and citations in the biomedical literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(4), 656–669. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23101
Ladeiras-Lopes, R., Clarke, S., Vidal-Perez, R., Alexander, M., & Lüscher, T. F. (2020). X promotion predicts citation rates of cardiovascular articles: A preliminary analysis from the ESC Journals Randomized Study. European Heart Journal, 41(34), 3222–3225. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa211
Priem, J., & Hemminger, B. H. (2010). Scientometrics 2.0: New metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web. First Monday. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v15i7.2874
Priem, J., Piwowar, H. A., & Hemminger, B. M. (2012). Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact (arXiv:1203.4745). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1203.4745
Salajegheh, M., & Dayari, S. (2019). Comparing the Citations Counts and Altmetrics of the Top Medical Science Journals in Scopus. International Journal of Information Science and Management (IJISM), 17(1), 59.
Strehle, E. M., & Shabde, N. (2006). One hundred years of telemedicine: Does this new technology have a place in paediatrics? Archives of Disease in Childhood, 91(12), 956–959. https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.2006.099622
Sud, P., & Thelwall, M. (2014). Evaluating altmetrics. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1131–1143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1117-2
Światowa Organizacja Zdrowia. (2010). Telemedicine: Opportunities and developments in member states : report on the second global survey on eHealth. https://www.who.int/goe/publications/goe_telemedicine_2010.pdf
The donut and Altmetric Attention Score. (2015, July 9). Altmetric. https://www.altmetric.com/about-our-data/the-donut-and-score/
Thelwall, M., Haustein, S., Larivière, V., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2013). Do Altmetrics Work? X and Ten Other Social Web Services. PLOS ONE, 8(5), e64841. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0064841
Walters, W. H., & Markgren, S. (2019). Do faculty journal selections correspond to objective indicators of citation impact? Results for 20 academic departments at Manhattan College. Scientometrics, 118(1), 321–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2972-7
What are altmetrics? (2015, June 2). Altmetric. https://www.altmetric.com/about-altmetrics/what-are-altmetrics/
Wouters, P., & Costas, R. (2012). SURF Report: Users, narcissism and control: Tracking the impact of scholarly publications in the 21st century. Research Acumen. http://research-acumen.eu/wp-content/uploads/Users-narcissism-and-control.pdf
Zhao, R., & Wang, X. (2019). Research on impact evaluation of academic journals from multidimensional perspective: Taking international multi-disciplinary journals as an example. Library Hi Tech, 38(2), 458–478. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-03-2019-0067
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of Indian Library Association
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
