Altmetric score, reads, and citations in paediatric cardiology: do they correlate and what do they mean?

Abstract

AbstractIntroduction:The primary objective of this study was to determine whether Altmetric score, number of reads, and citations for paediatric cardiology manuscripts correlate with one another. A secondary objective was to determine the extent to which factors mediated citation number for paediatric cardiology manuscripts.Methods:Data for this study came from manuscripts published inCardiology in the Young(2010–2021). Data were extracted by using data shared on the journal website. Spearman’s correlation analyses were conducted between manuscript reads, citations, and Altmetric score. Regression analyses were conducted with number of citations as the dependent variable and year of publication, publication type, number of reads, and Altmetric score as independent variables.Results:A total of 2642 manuscripts were included in the final analyses. Reads and citations had poor correlation (r-value 0.32); reads and Altmetric score had negligible correlation (r-value 0.26); and Altmetric score and citations had negligible correlation (r-value 0.07). Year of publication was independently associated with number of citations (β –0.95, p-value <0.01). Manuscript type was independently associated with number of citations (β 1.04, p-value <0.01). Number of reads was independently associated with citations (β 0.01, p-value <0.01). Altmetric score was independently associated with number of citations (β 0.05, p-value <0.01).Conclusion:This study describes the correlation of reads, citations, and Altmetric score in manuscripts published inCardiology in the Young, demonstrating poor correlation, at best, between these metrics. Each bibliometric index seems to represent a different phenomenon of manuscript consumption. No single bibliometric index in isolation offers ample representation of manuscript consumption.