医学出版物的影响力是否因疾病适应症和出版物类型而异?使用基于价值的新型出版度量框架:EMPIRE 指数进行探索。

Q2 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics F1000Research Pub Date : 2024-10-30 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.12688/f1000research.75805.5
Tomas Rees, Avishek Pal
{"title":"医学出版物的影响力是否因疾病适应症和出版物类型而异?使用基于价值的新型出版度量框架:EMPIRE 指数进行探索。","authors":"Tomas Rees, Avishek Pal","doi":"10.12688/f1000research.75805.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The EMPIRE (EMpirical Publication Impact and Reach Evaluation) Index is a value-based, multi-component metric framework to assess the impact of medical publications in terms of relevance to different stakeholders. It comprises three component scores (social, scholarly and societal impact), each incorporating related altmetrics that indicate a different aspect of engagement with the publication. Here, we present an exploratory investigation of whether publication types or disease indications influence EMPIRE Index scores.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Article-level metrics were extracted and EMPIRE Index scores were calculated for 5825 journal articles published from 1 May 2017 to 1 May 2018, representing 12 disease indications (chosen to reflect a wide variety of common and rare diseases with a variety of aetiologies) and five publication types.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were significant differences in scores between article types and disease indications. Median (95% CI) social and scholarly impact scores ranged from 1.2 (0.3-1.6) to 4.8 (3.1-6.6), respectively, for phase 3 clinical trials, and from 0.3 (0.3-0.4) to 2.3 (1.9-2.6), respectively, for observational studies. Social and scholarly impact scores were highest for multiple sclerosis publications and lowest for non-small cell lung cancer publications. Systematic reviews achieved greater impact than regular reviews. Median trends in the social impact of different disease areas matched the level of public interest as assessed through Google search interest. Although most articles did not register societal impact, mean societal impact scores were highest for migraine publications.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The EMPIRE Index successfully identified differences in impact by disease area and publication type, which supports the notion that the impact of each publication needs to be evaluated in the context of these factors, and potentially others. These findings should be considered when using the EMPIRE Index to assess publication impact.</p>","PeriodicalId":12260,"journal":{"name":"F1000Research","volume":"11 ","pages":"107"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11549536/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does the impact of medical publications vary by disease indication and publication type? An exploration using a novel, value-based, publication metric framework: the EMPIRE Index.\",\"authors\":\"Tomas Rees, Avishek Pal\",\"doi\":\"10.12688/f1000research.75805.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The EMPIRE (EMpirical Publication Impact and Reach Evaluation) Index is a value-based, multi-component metric framework to assess the impact of medical publications in terms of relevance to different stakeholders. It comprises three component scores (social, scholarly and societal impact), each incorporating related altmetrics that indicate a different aspect of engagement with the publication. Here, we present an exploratory investigation of whether publication types or disease indications influence EMPIRE Index scores.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Article-level metrics were extracted and EMPIRE Index scores were calculated for 5825 journal articles published from 1 May 2017 to 1 May 2018, representing 12 disease indications (chosen to reflect a wide variety of common and rare diseases with a variety of aetiologies) and five publication types.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were significant differences in scores between article types and disease indications. Median (95% CI) social and scholarly impact scores ranged from 1.2 (0.3-1.6) to 4.8 (3.1-6.6), respectively, for phase 3 clinical trials, and from 0.3 (0.3-0.4) to 2.3 (1.9-2.6), respectively, for observational studies. Social and scholarly impact scores were highest for multiple sclerosis publications and lowest for non-small cell lung cancer publications. Systematic reviews achieved greater impact than regular reviews. Median trends in the social impact of different disease areas matched the level of public interest as assessed through Google search interest. Although most articles did not register societal impact, mean societal impact scores were highest for migraine publications.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The EMPIRE Index successfully identified differences in impact by disease area and publication type, which supports the notion that the impact of each publication needs to be evaluated in the context of these factors, and potentially others. These findings should be considered when using the EMPIRE Index to assess publication impact.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12260,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"F1000Research\",\"volume\":\"11 \",\"pages\":\"107\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11549536/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"F1000Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.75805.5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"F1000Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.75805.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:EMPIRE(EMpirical Publication Impact and Reach Evaluation)指数是一个基于价值的多成分度量框架,用于评估医学出版物对不同利益相关者的影响。该指数由三个组成部分(社会影响、学术影响和社会影响)组成,每个组成部分都包含相关的衡量指标,这些指标从不同方面表明了出版物的影响力。在此,我们对出版物类型或疾病适应症是否会影响 EMPIRE 指数得分进行了探索性研究:我们提取了2017年5月1日至2018年5月1日期间发表的5825篇期刊论文的文章级指标,并计算了EMPIRE指数得分,这些文章代表了12种疾病适应症(选择这些适应症是为了反映具有各种病因的常见病和罕见病)和5种出版物类型:不同文章类型和疾病适应症的得分存在明显差异。3期临床试验的社会和学术影响力得分中位数(95% CI)分别从1.2(0.3-1.6)到4.8(3.1-6.6)不等,观察性研究的社会和学术影响力得分中位数分别从0.3(0.3-0.4)到2.3(1.9-2.6)不等。社会和学术影响力得分最高的是多发性硬化症出版物,最低的是非小细胞肺癌出版物。系统综述的影响力大于常规综述。不同疾病领域社会影响的中值趋势与谷歌搜索兴趣所评估的公众兴趣水平相吻合。虽然大多数文章没有登记社会影响,但偏头痛出版物的平均社会影响得分最高:EMPIRE指数成功地发现了不同疾病领域和出版物类型在影响力方面的差异,这支持了一种观点,即每篇出版物的影响力都需要结合这些因素以及可能的其他因素进行评估。在使用 EMPIRE 指数评估出版物影响力时应考虑这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Does the impact of medical publications vary by disease indication and publication type? An exploration using a novel, value-based, publication metric framework: the EMPIRE Index.

Background: The EMPIRE (EMpirical Publication Impact and Reach Evaluation) Index is a value-based, multi-component metric framework to assess the impact of medical publications in terms of relevance to different stakeholders. It comprises three component scores (social, scholarly and societal impact), each incorporating related altmetrics that indicate a different aspect of engagement with the publication. Here, we present an exploratory investigation of whether publication types or disease indications influence EMPIRE Index scores.

Methods: Article-level metrics were extracted and EMPIRE Index scores were calculated for 5825 journal articles published from 1 May 2017 to 1 May 2018, representing 12 disease indications (chosen to reflect a wide variety of common and rare diseases with a variety of aetiologies) and five publication types.

Results: There were significant differences in scores between article types and disease indications. Median (95% CI) social and scholarly impact scores ranged from 1.2 (0.3-1.6) to 4.8 (3.1-6.6), respectively, for phase 3 clinical trials, and from 0.3 (0.3-0.4) to 2.3 (1.9-2.6), respectively, for observational studies. Social and scholarly impact scores were highest for multiple sclerosis publications and lowest for non-small cell lung cancer publications. Systematic reviews achieved greater impact than regular reviews. Median trends in the social impact of different disease areas matched the level of public interest as assessed through Google search interest. Although most articles did not register societal impact, mean societal impact scores were highest for migraine publications.

Conclusions: The EMPIRE Index successfully identified differences in impact by disease area and publication type, which supports the notion that the impact of each publication needs to be evaluated in the context of these factors, and potentially others. These findings should be considered when using the EMPIRE Index to assess publication impact.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
F1000Research
F1000Research Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics (all)
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1646
审稿时长
1 weeks
期刊介绍: F1000Research publishes articles and other research outputs reporting basic scientific, scholarly, translational and clinical research across the physical and life sciences, engineering, medicine, social sciences and humanities. F1000Research is a scholarly publication platform set up for the scientific, scholarly and medical research community; each article has at least one author who is a qualified researcher, scholar or clinician actively working in their speciality and who has made a key contribution to the article. Articles must be original (not duplications). All research is suitable irrespective of the perceived level of interest or novelty; we welcome confirmatory and negative results, as well as null studies. F1000Research publishes different type of research, including clinical trials, systematic reviews, software tools, method articles, and many others. Reviews and Opinion articles providing a balanced and comprehensive overview of the latest discoveries in a particular field, or presenting a personal perspective on recent developments, are also welcome. See the full list of article types we accept for more information.
期刊最新文献
Biological properties of Moringa oleifera: A systematic review of the last decade. Experiences Using Media Health Claims to Teach Evidence-Based Practice to Healthcare Students: A Mixed Methods Study. Impact of distress and anxiety due to COVID-19 on digital addictions in university students in the third wave period . A reference genome for the eastern bettong ( Bettongia gaimardi). Hormonal Influences on ADC Values in Breast Tissues: A Scoping Review of DWI in Pre- and Post-menopausal Women.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1