ReviewArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2022
Positive Association Between Online Attention and the Bibliometric Impact of Shoulder Instability Publications.
Review in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impact of randomized controlled trials on the management of anterior shoulder instability: A bibliometric and altmetrics analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Article
- The Top-20 Studies About Anterior Shoulder Instability From an Altmetric Analysis Had Higher Levels of Evidence Than Those From a Traditional Bibliometric Analysis.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- The impact of surgical randomised controlled trials on the management of FAI syndrome: a citation analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To obtain a quantifiable measure of the frequency with which a shoulder instability article is discussed online and the association with its corresponding bibliometric impact, based on the Scopus Cite Score (SCS) or Web of Science Impact Factor (WSIF). Methods: The top 100 most-mentioned articles on shoulder instability based on Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) were extracted from the Altmetric Database. Mentions within blogs, news articles and outlets, public policy, and social media platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook, were included. Study impact was assessed using SCS or WSIF. The degree of association between AAS and impact was determined using Spearman correlation, logarithmic regression, and multivariate regression. Results: The most common study designs were "Clinical Trial," with 52 articles (49.5%), "Systematic Review" with 16 articles (15.2%), and "Review" with 10 articles (9.5%). Twitter provided more online mentions than other platforms, with the average article being discussed 27.7 times (range 0-220 times). A significant positive effect (estimate = 2.616, Conclusions: Social media and other online platforms are a strong way to disseminate information to patients. A positive association was observed between overall online attention and the bibliometric impact of an article related to shoulder instability. Clinical trials related to shoulder instability that receive online mentions, especially discussion in blogs, are more likely to be cited in the future than their counterparts. Clinical Relevance: The results of our study can guide authors as they aim to disseminate their articles. Twitter may be used as a tool to reach patients who may not venture into academic journals with current peer-reviewed articles. Further, blogs may be used to reach academic audiences and raise bibliometric impact broadly.
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.