Measuring the social impact of nursing research: An insight into altmetrics

: 目的: 本研究的目的是(a)确定引起最多在线活动和讨论的《护理期刊》的文章以及(b)评估这些文章的评价指标得分、发表特征、引文数以及出版期刊指标之间的关系 背景: 评价指标或选择性指标,通过评估公众参与研究成果的程度衡量研究的社会影响,最近已成为一种衡量社会影响的补充方式。到目前为止,还没有研究调查过网上对护理领域发表的科技论文的关注度。 设计: 定量和定性综合证明相结合 数据来源和综述方法: InCites期刊引证报告用于建立因特网版引用文献索引数据库系统的护理期刊索引列表。将Altmetric浏览器作为评价指标获取工具。在Altmetric浏览器中搜索,共有66,608项研究成果,出自188本护理期刊。挑出前100篇评价指标关注度评分(AAS)的文章并 建立新的搜索机制(仅限于这100篇文章),生成针对这些文章的聚合指标。 结果: 这100篇文章的评价指标关注度均分为248,得分在139至649之间。这些文章在Twitter上讨论最多,其次是新闻媒体和Mendeley。与其他健康期刊发表的文章进行比较,护理期刊分类收录的文章在网上的关注度很低。 2012年至2018年,Twitter仍是主要的关注来源,远超于第二的新闻媒体。大多数在线关注人群来自美国和英国。在本研究提到的前100篇文章中,《高级护理期刊》发表的文章最多。(N = 26;平均AAS=179)。在Q1期刊上发表的文章与Q2、Q3期刊上发表的文章的评价指标关注度评分没有显著差异。文章的评价指标关注度评分与其在斯高帕斯数据库和科学网上的引文数量之间存在着显著的相关关系。发表日期与在斯高帕斯数据库和科学网上的引文数量显著相关,但与评价指标关注度评分没有关系。 结论: 评价指标很可能会随着社交媒体和在线平台的迅速扩大而继续发展。随着护理行业继续发展,我们的研究和学术成果将为政策制定提供依据,并转化为实践,其科学价值将得到人们的认可,我们必须保持探索最佳的传播方式。. BACKGROUND: Altmetrics, or alternative metrics, have recently emerged as a complementary way of measuring the societal impact of research by assessing the public engagement with research output. To date, no studies have yet investigated the online attention about scientific papers published in the nursing field. DESIGN: Integration of quantitative and qualitative synthesized evidence. DATA SOURCES AND REVIEW METHODS: InCites Journal Citation Report was used to identify a list of nursing journals indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection. Altmetric Explorer was selected as an altmetrics harvesting tool. The search in Altmetric Explorer yielded 66,608 research outputs from 118 nursing journals. The articles with the top 100 altmetric attention score (AAS) were identified and a new search, limited to only those 100 articles, was run to produce aggregate metrics specific to those articles. The articles were also exported for thematic analysis. RESULTS: The median AAS for the 100 articles was 248, ranging from 138 - 649. The articles were mostly discussed on Twitter, followed by news outlets and Mendeley. Articles indexed in the nursing journals category attracted low online attention compared with articles published in other health journal categories. Twitter remained the dominant source of attention over the years 2012-2018, followed distantly by news outlets. Most online attention came from the USA and the UK. Of the top 100 articles included in the study, the Journal of Advanced Nursing published the highest number of articles (N = 26; Median AAS = 179). The AAS was not significantly different between articles published in Q1 journals and those published in Q2 and Q3 journals. There was a significant relationship between articles' AASs and their citation counts on Scopus and Web of Science. Publication date was significantly related to citation counts on Scopus and Web of Science but not with AASs. CONCLUSION: Altmetrics will likely continue to evolve alongside the rapidly expanding use of social media and online platforms. As nursing continues to strive to have our research and scholarship inform policy, translated into practice and recognized for its scientific merit, we have to remain vigilant about the best ways to disseminate the important work we are doing. Research, such as this study, will allow nursing scholars to benchmark our progress as we adapt to the changing environment for measuring impact and quality in the digital age.