ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2021
Harnessing the True Power of Altmetrics to Track Engagement.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mapping 60 Years of Discovery: An AI-Driven Bibliometric and Altmetric Analysis of the Journal of Periodontal Research.Journal of periodontal research · 2025Article
- The correlation between altmetric score and traditional measures of article impact for studies pertaining to spine trauma.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024Review
- Tweeting for Success: The Role of Twitter in Enhancing SCImago Journal Rank for Specialty Surgical Journals.Cureus · 2023Article
- Designing Infographics: Visual Representations for Enhancing Education, Communication, and Scientific Research.Journal of Korean medical science · 2022Article
- Global research trends of artificial intelligence applied in esophageal carcinoma: A bibliometric analysis (2000-2022)Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Altmetrics has recently been at the forefront of tracking medical literature propagation on social media in the modern era. With the rapidly evolving landscape of social media for academia, there's room to revise the approach. The authors discuss current limitations and suggest changes to make online attention trackers more robust and wholesome. Medical literature propagated on currently popular social media platforms like Instagram or TikTok are not accounted for by altmetrics. For altmetrics to become a more robust tool it is vital that it keeps up with the times and accounts for representation of data from these platforms as well. Greater inclusivity, dynamic weightage of different social media platforms based on location dependant availability and usage, and period re-evaluation based on prevailing trends may help metrics reflect the true attention garnered by published research. Besides, development of hybrid scores with separate components to reflect online attention and traditional citations may provide readers a more fair and balanced perception of the actual importance of an article. With the changes proposed, altmetrics has the potential to become a much more inclusive and reflective tool in times to come.
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.