Ophthalmic plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2025
Thyroid Eye Disease Research From 2010 to 2024: An Analysis of Social Media Impact Versus Traditional Citation Metrics.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhao Aaron T, Katowitz William R
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To analyze the relationship between traditional bibliometric measures and Altmetric Scores for articles on thyroid eye disease, examining their scientific and social media impact from 2010 to 2024.
METHODS: The authors analyzed the 100 most-cited articles on thyroid eye disease from the Web of Science Core Collection, comparing traditional citation metrics with Altmetric Attention Scores. Statistical analyses included Spearman correlation, temporal trend analysis, and comparison of impact patterns across journals and publication years.
RESULTS: Among the top 100 cited articles, the authors found a moderate positive correlation between citations and Altmetric Scores ( r = 0.350, p = 0.002). Only 8% of articles achieved high impact in both metrics (>Q3). The median citation count was 40 (interquartile range: 32-59; range: 26-531), while the median Altmetric Score was 3 (interquartile range: 1-10; range: 1-546). Recent articles (2020-2024) showed significantly higher Altmetric Scores compared with earlier periods (median: 11 vs. 1, p < 0.0001). Open access articles demonstrated higher impact in both metrics compared with subscription-based articles.
CONCLUSION: Traditional citation metrics and social media impact measures capture different aspects of research influence in thyroid eye disease literature. The emergence of high-impact therapeutic studies, particularly regarding teprotumumab, demonstrates how breakthrough research can achieve substantial impact across both traditional and alternative metrics. Given the increasing role of social media in research dissemination and patient education, clinicians should consider both traditional and alternative metrics when evaluating research impact and should be prepared to discuss studies that achieve high social media engagement with patients.
METHODS: The authors analyzed the 100 most-cited articles on thyroid eye disease from the Web of Science Core Collection, comparing traditional citation metrics with Altmetric Attention Scores. Statistical analyses included Spearman correlation, temporal trend analysis, and comparison of impact patterns across journals and publication years.
RESULTS: Among the top 100 cited articles, the authors found a moderate positive correlation between citations and Altmetric Scores ( r = 0.350, p = 0.002). Only 8% of articles achieved high impact in both metrics (>Q3). The median citation count was 40 (interquartile range: 32-59; range: 26-531), while the median Altmetric Score was 3 (interquartile range: 1-10; range: 1-546). Recent articles (2020-2024) showed significantly higher Altmetric Scores compared with earlier periods (median: 11 vs. 1, p < 0.0001). Open access articles demonstrated higher impact in both metrics compared with subscription-based articles.
CONCLUSION: Traditional citation metrics and social media impact measures capture different aspects of research influence in thyroid eye disease literature. The emergence of high-impact therapeutic studies, particularly regarding teprotumumab, demonstrates how breakthrough research can achieve substantial impact across both traditional and alternative metrics. Given the increasing role of social media in research dissemination and patient education, clinicians should consider both traditional and alternative metrics when evaluating research impact and should be prepared to discuss studies that achieve high social media engagement with patients.