↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Does a research group increase impact on the scientific community or general public discussion? Alternative metric-based evaluation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#9 of 1,969)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
59 news outlets
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Does a research group increase impact on the scientific community or general public discussion? Alternative metric-based evaluation
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, June 2016
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s104704
Pubmed ID
Authors

Manuela De Gregori, Valeria Scotti, Annalisa De Silvestri, Moreno Curti, Guido Fanelli, Massimo Allegri, Michael E Schatman

Abstract

In this study, we investigated the impact of scientific publications of the Italian SIMPAR (Study In Multidisciplinary PAin Research) group by using altmetrics, defined as nontraditional metrics constituting an alternative to more traditional citation-impact metrics, such as impact factor and H-index. By correlating traditional and alternative metrics, we attempted to verify whether publications by the SIMPAR group collectively had more impact than those performed by its individual members, either in solo publications or in publications coauthored by non-SIMPAR group investigators (which for the purpose of this study we will refer to as "individual publications"). For all the 12 members of the group analyzed (pain therapists, biologists, and pharmacologists), we created Open Researcher and Contributor ID and Impact Story accounts, and synchronized these data. Manually, we calculated the level metrics for each article by dividing the data obtained from the research community by those obtained from the public community. We analyzed 759 articles, 18 of which were published by the SIMPAR group. Altmetrics demonstrated that SIMPAR group publications were more likely to be saved (77.8% vs 45.9%), discussed (61.1% vs 1.1%, P<0.0001), and publicly viewed (11.1% vs 1.3%, P=0.05) than individual publications. These results support the importance of multidisciplinary research groups in the impact of scientific literature; the interaction and synergy among the research participants allowed the obtainment of high impact-literature in the field of personalized pain medicine. Finally, our findings demonstrate the potential of altmetrics in estimating the value of the research products of a group.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 4%
Netherlands 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
South Africa 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
Unknown 40 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 28%
Librarian 8 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 4 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 30%
Social Sciences 10 22%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 6 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 468. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 August 2019.
All research outputs
#58,270
of 25,582,611 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#9
of 1,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,219
of 354,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#4
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,582,611 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,969 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 354,173 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.