"Super-Papers" Make More Impact: A Bibliometric and Altmetric Databases Analysis of MASLD Publications
Kaminski Rosenberg, T.; Lazarus, J. V.; Zelber-Sagi, S.
Show abstract
AimsTraditional evaluation of research impact was based on citation analyses, but the alternative metrics (altmetrics) measure broader societal impact. We aimed to explore the association between academic and societal impact of papers across two Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) fields; lifestyle and burden/policy, and to identify the factors predicting the citation of a paper within policy documents. MethodsWe conducted a database analytic study of the 100 top-cited and 100 top-Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) papers dealing with MASLD in relation to lifestyle or to burden/policy fields. The papers were retrieved from the Web of Science platform and Altmetric Explorer database. Policy citation data were complemented from the Overton database. Papers within both 100 top-AAS and 100 top-cited papers lists in each field were defined as "super-papers". ResultsA moderate correlation was found between citations and AAS in both lifestyle and burden/policy fields (r=0.399, P<0.001 and r=0.455, P<0.001, respectively). A five-unit increase in the journals impact factor augmented the probability of a lifestyle paper being a "super-paper" by 10% (95% confidence interval 1.02-1.19). Open access publishing increased the likelihood of a burden/policy paper being a "super-paper" by 3.33-fold (1.26-8.85, P=0.015). "Super-papers" were significantly more likely to be cited within policy documents compared to being either top-cited or top-AAS papers by 2.60 (1.06-6.37 P=0.036) and 4.53-fold (1.68-12.19 P=0.003) respectively in the burden/policy field. ConclusionPapers in the field of MASLD that are better disseminated across both academic and societal platforms are associated with higher policy impact.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- COVID-19-related research data availability and quality according to the FAIR principles: A meta-research study 95%
- Investigating the Nature of Open Science Practices Across Complementary, Alternative, and Integrative Medicine Journals: An Audit 95%
- Introducing the EMPIRE Index: A novel, value-based metric framework to measure the impact of medical publications 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- How the COVID-19 pandemic is shaping research in Africa: inequalities in scholarly output and collaborations and new opportunities for scientific leadership 93%
- Studies of Novel Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) Pandemic: A Global Analysis of Literature 90%
- Quality assessment of studies included in Cochrane oral health systematic reviews 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Publishing at any cost: a cross-sectional study of the amount that medical researchers spend on open-access publishing each year 95%
- Comparison of preprints and final journal publications from COVID-19 Studies: Discrepancies in results reporting and spin in interpretation 93%
- GPT for RCTs?: Using AI to measure adherence to reporting guidelines 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Full Publication of Preprint Articles in Prevention Research: An Analysis of Publication Proportions and Results Consistency 93%
- Researcher and Clinician Preferences for a Journal Transparency Tool: A Mixed-Methods Survey and Focus Group Study 93%
- More than 50 Long-term effects of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.