ArticleCanadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie2025
Relationship between Altmetric scores and traditional metrics in the anesthesiology literature.
Article in Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCitation-based metrics are traditionally used to assess research impact, but they have limitations. In today's digital age, newer social-media-based metrics, such as Altmetric scores, may be important. An Altmetric score is generated on the basis of the amount of engagement a research article has on online media platforms such as X (formerly Twitter). This study's objectives were to understand the relationship between the Altmetric score and article citation count/traditional metrics in the anesthesiology literature as well as to determine predictors of higher Altmetric scores.
methodsIn this cross-sectional observational study, we identified two sets of articles (the 100 top-cited articles and 100 articles selected at random) published in 2019 and 2020 for each of the top 5 general anesthesiology journals ranked by 2021 impact factor: Anaesthesia, the British Journal of Anaesthesia, the Journal of Clinical Anesthesia, Anesthesiology, and the Canadian Journal of Anesthesia. Two independent researchers extracted data, including the citation count and Altmetric total and component scores. Following this, we performed correlation analyses between various parameters.
resultsThe journal Anaesthesia had the highest impact factor and positive correlation between Altmetric score and article citation count (ρ = 0.46; P < 0.001). There was a moderate positive correlation between the citation count and the Altmetric score for all journals in the randomly selected group, with the exception of the Journal of Clinical Anesthesia. Greater X engagement was a good predictor relative to the other factors for a higher Altmetric score.
conclusionsFor most anesthesiology journals studied, the Altmetric score showed a positive correlation with the citation count and impact factor. Altmetrics have the potential to show the social impact of research in anesthesia, but this is limited to X engagement. The Altmetric score is largely influenced by greater social media engagement on X.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41709073What 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.