ArticleAMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science2014
Temporal analysis of the usage log of a research networking system.
Article in AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite the proliferation of research networking systems (RNS), their value and usage remains unknown. This study aims to characterize the temporal usage of an RNS, Columbia University Scientific Profiles (CUSP), and to inform the designs of general RNSs. We installed a free usage logging service, Google Analytics, on CUSP and applied time series analysis to compare the usage patterns of the two modes of CUSP: restricted (authenticated) and open access. More users searched by person names than by topics, although the latter enables in-depth vertical search of co-author or co-investigator networks for grants or publications. The open-access mode received more page views but less average time spent on each page than the restricted access mode. The numbers of unique users and searches have increased over the time. This study contributes a trend analysis framework for understanding the usage of RNSs and early knowledge of the usage of an open-access RNS.
Identifiers
25954587PMC4419755What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.