ArticlePloS one2018
Do altmetrics correlate with the quality of papers? A large-scale empirical study based on F1000Prime data.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Global trends and collaborative networks in gut microbiota-insulin resistance research: a comprehensive bibliometric analysis (2000-2024).Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- What are the variables associated with Altmetric scores?Systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Correction: Do altmetrics correlate with the quality of papers? A large-scale empirical study based on F1000Prime data.PloS one · 2025Article
- Trends and Patterns in Mandible Bone Cancer Research: An Updated Comprehensive Bibliometric Review : Prevalence of Supernumerary Teeth in Patients with Cleft lip and Palate.Galen medical journal · 2024Article
- Impact of COVID-19 Dentistry-Related Literature: An Altmetric Study.International dental journal · 2023Review
- Assessment of the Dissemination of COVID-19-Related Articles Across Social Media: Altmetrics Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- The role of blogs and news sites in science communication during the COVID-19 pandemic.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2022Review
- Introducing the EMPIRE Index: A novel, value-based metric framework to measure the impact of medical publications.PloS one · 2022Article
- Social media usage to share information in communication journals: An analysis of social media activity and article citations.PloS one · 2022Article
- Impact of Altmetrics in evaluation of scientific journals, research outputs and scientists' careers: Views of editors of high impact anaesthesia, critical care and pain medicine journals.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2021Article
- How do urogynecology and pelvic floor dysfunction terms used in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery research relate to social media indicators?International urogynecology journal · 2021Article
- Article-Level Metrics.Journal of Korean medical science · 2021Review
- Assessing the Dissemination of COVID-19 Articles Across Social Media With Altmetric and PlumX Metrics: Correlational Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Using altmetrics for detecting impactful research in quasi-zero-day time-windows: the case of COVID-19.Scientometrics · 2021Article
- Altmetrics Attention Scores for Randomized Controlled Trials in Total Joint Arthroplasty Are Reflective of High Scientific Quality: An Altmetrics-Based Methodological Quality and Bias Analysis.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2020Article
- Cross-sectional analysis of bibliometrics and altmetrics: comparing the impact of qualitative and quantitative articles in theBMJ open · 2020Article
- Article
- Measuring an individual researcher's impact: new directions and challenges.Evidence-based mental health · 2020Review
- Identifying the princes base on Altmetrics: An awakening mechanism of sleeping beauties from the perspective of social media.PloS one · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, we address the question whether (and to what extent, respectively) altmetrics are related to the scientific quality of papers (as measured by peer assessments). Only a few studies have previously investigated the relationship between altmetrics and assessments by peers. In the first step, we analyse the underlying dimensions of measurement for traditional metrics (citation counts) and altmetrics-by using principal component analysis (PCA) and factor analysis (FA). In the second step, we test the relationship between the dimensions and quality of papers (as measured by the post-publication peer-review system of F1000Prime assessments)-using regression analysis. The results of the PCA and FA show that altmetrics operate along different dimensions, whereas Mendeley counts are related to citation counts, and tweets form a separate dimension. The results of the regression analysis indicate that citation-based metrics and readership counts are significantly more related to quality, than tweets. This result on the one hand questions the use of Twitter counts for research evaluation purposes and on the other hand indicates potential use of Mendeley reader counts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.