Key Points
-
Highlights Altmetric data of all dental articles and journals in 2015.
-
Demonstrates that the British Dental Journal had the first rank, followed by Journal of Dental Research, Journal of Clinical Periodontology and Journal of the American Dental Association.
-
Shows that Mendeley readers, Twitter, Facebook walls, news outlets and bloggers were the most popular Altmetric data resources.
Abstract
Introduction To report and analyse Altmetric data of all dental articles and journals in 2015.
Methods To identify all 2015 dental articles, PubMed was searched via Altmetric platform using the following query: (“2015/1/1”[PDAT]: “2015/12/31”[PDAT]) AND jsubsetd[text] NOT 2016[PDAT] on November 12, 2016. Altmetric data of all 2015 dental articles and journals were extracted and analysed by Microsoft Office Excel 2016 using descriptive statistics, graphs and trend-line analysis. To find the most important and influential Altmetric factors, multi-layered perceptron artificial neural network was employed using SPSS 22.
Results A total of 14,884 dental articles published in 2015 using PubMed database were found, from which 5,153 (34.62%) articles had an Altmetric score. The mean Altmetric score was 2.94 ± 9.2 (95% C.I:2.703.22). Mendeley readers (73.19%), Twitter (21.48%), Facebook walls (3.67%), news outlets (0.69%) and bloggers (0.57%) were the most popular Altmetric data resources. At journal level, 147 dental journals with valid Altmetric data were included in the study. The British Dental Journal had the first rank, followed by Journal of Dental Research, Journal of Clinical Periodontology and Journal of the American Dental Association. Sensitivity analysis showed news outlets, tweeters and scientific bloggers were the most important and influential Altmetric data resources.
Discussion In comparison with all science subjects and medical and health sciences, 2015 Altmetric scores in dentistry were very low. Uses of new and emerging scholarly tools such as social media, scientific blogs and post-publication peer-review were not common in the dental science. This negligence may be due to lack of knowledge and attitude. An Altmetric score is dynamic and may fluctuate over time.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
Altmetric is a new, emerging, diverse and rapid scholarly tool that measures the online attention surrounding journal articles.1,2,3 Indeed, it is not a replacement for classic citation analysis which is known as bibliometrics. Altmetrics can be seen a complement to bibliometrics and can provide a better public view of the impact of a research finding.1,4,5,6,7 Altmetric data resources, algorithm for calculation of an Altmetric score, and its advantages and limitations have been discussed in our previous article.1 Nevertheless, the aim of this study was to analyse the Altmetric data of all dental articles and journals in 2015.
Methods
To find all 2015 dental articles, PubMed was searched via the Altmetric platform using the following query: (“2015/1/1”[PDAT]: “2015/12/31”[PDAT]) AND jsubsetd[text] NOT 2016[PDAT] on 12 November 2016. Altmetric data of all 2015 dental articles and journals were extracted and analysed by Microsoft Office Excel 2016 using descriptive statistics, graphs and trend-line analysis.
To find the most important and influential Altmetric factors in 2015 dental literature, the multi-layered perceptron artificial neural network was used. Artificial neural networks are effective and efficient tools to analyse big, complicated and imprecise data. They are computer programmes that analyse data in the same way that the human brain does. They involve networks of extremely interconnected computer processors named 'neurons' that are able to perform parallel and fast computations for data processing and knowledge representation. Of more interest, knowledge can be acquired by artificial neural network through a training process.8,9 A trained artificial neural network can be used to extract patterns and detect trends that are too complex to be discovered by either humans or other computer systems.10
However, the multi-layered perceptron model, one of the most effective and common artificial neural network models, was used.11,12 The architecture of the proposed feed-forward artificial neural network involved two hidden layers; 70% of the data were chosen randomly for supervised, batch network training, and the remaining 30% of data were used for network test. The hidden layer activation function is hyperbolic tangent and output layer activation function is identity. Scaled conjugate gradient was used to estimate the synaptic weights. Artificial neural network analyses were carried out by SPSS 22 (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.).
Results
A total of 14,884 dental articles published in 2015 were found using the PubMed database, from which 5,153 (34.62%) articles had valid Altmetric data and were included in the study. The mean Altmetric score was 2.94 ± 9.2 (95% Confidence interval: 2.70–3.22) (Fig. 1). Mendeley readers (73.19%), Twitter (21.48%), Facebook walls (3.67%) news outlets (0.69%) and bloggers (0.57%) were the most popular Altmetric data resources (Fig. 2). Google+ (0.18%), Wikipedia pages (0.09%), CiteULike readers (0.07%), Peer review sites (0.02%), Policy documents (0.01%), F1000 reviews (0.001%), Reddit threads (0.001%) and Weibo users (0.001%) were used infrequently (Fig. 2). There were no records from Pinterest, Q&A sites and book reviews.
At journal level, 147 dental journals with valid Altmetric data were included in the study. The sum of Altmetric scores of articles for each journal (Mean: 86.34 ± 240.98, 95% Confidence interval: 53.70–133.31) and number of articles with Altmetric scores (Mean: 34.55 ± 59.95, 95% Confidence interval: 25.95–45.53) were analysed (Fig. 3). In view of the sum of Altmetric scores of articles, the British Dental Journal obtained the first rank, followed by Journal of Dental Research, Journal of Clinical Periodontology and Journal of the American Dental Association (Figs 4 and 5).
With respect to the sum of scores of different Altmetric data resources (Fig. 2), to decrease the complexity of the artificial neural network, the top 5 potentially influential Altmetric resources were included in sensitivity analyses to find the most important and influential Altmetric factor in 2015 dental literature (Fig. 6). The analysis of the model summary provides solid evidence that the model is doing its job well (Table 1). Sensitivity analysis showed news outlets, tweeters and scientific bloggers were the most important and influential Altmetric data resources (Fig. 7). As a final point, readers should note that Altmetric analysis is a dynamic process and Altmetric scores may fluctuate over time.
Discussion
In our previous article, Altmetric top 50, 2014 dental articles were analysed.1 To achieve a comprehensive view on dental literature, in the present study all 14,884 dental articles published in 2015 and 147 dental journals with valid Altmetric data were analysed. Surprisingly, the results indicated that only 34.62% of 2015 dental articles had an Altmetric score. The highest 2015 Altmetric score in dentistry was 337, while it was 2,782 in medical and health sciences,13 which shows the public attention on medical subjects.
In this study, we used artificial intelligence to analyse big and combinatorial Altmetric data of the 2015 dental literature.14 The findings of artificial neural network analysis are interesting, in which Mendeley was the most common Altmetric data resource (73.19%); the artificial neural network showed it has only 16.3% normalized importance. At first glance, these results seem confusing, however, when we refer to the weighting values and calculation algorithm of an Altmetric score,15 we find out that artificial intelligence has found a suitable pattern in the data.
The use of new and influential scholarly tools such as social medias, scientific blogs, social stack exchange (Q&A) sites,16 post-publication peer-reviews,17 F1000 reviews,18 evidence-based policy making19 etc, were not common in dental science. This negligence may be due to a lack of knowledge and attitude. This issue has been discussed widely,20,21,22,23,24,25 and dental research scientists and journal editors should pay more attention to these emerging concepts.
References
Kolahi J, Khazaei S . Altmetric: Top 50 dental articles in 2014. BDJ 2016; 220: 569–574.
Kolahi J . Altmetrics: A new emerging issue for dental research scientists. Dent Hypotheses 2015; 6: 1.
Konkiel S . Altmetrics A 21st-century solution to determining research quality. Online Search 2013; 37: 11–15.
Melero R . Altmetrics – a complement to conventional metrics. Biochem medica 2015; 25: 152–160.
Thelwall M, Haustein S, Larivière V, Sugimoto C R . Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services. PLoS One 2013; 8: e64841.
Kwok R . Research impact: Altmetrics make their mark. Nature 2013; 500: 491–493.
Dinsmore A, Allen L, Dolby K . Alternative perspectives on impact: the potential of ALMs and altmetrics to inform funders about research impact. PLoS Biol 2014; 12: e1002003.
IBM. IBM SPSS Neural Networks New tools for building predictive models Why use a neural network? Available online at http://www.spss.ch/de/software/22/pdf/ (accessed November 2016).
IBM. IBM SPSS Neural Networks 22. Available online at http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/pdfs/SPSS_Neural_Network_22.pdf (accessed November 2016).
Stergiou C, Siganos D . Neural Networks. Available online at https://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/∼nd/surprise_96/journal/vol4/cs11/report.html (accessed March 2017).
Rivals I, Personnaz L . MLPs (Mono-Layer Polynomials and Multi-Layer Perceptrons) for Nonlinear Modeling. J Mach Learn Res 2003; 3: 1383–1398.
Principe J C, Euliano N R, Lefebvre W C . Sky Software HelptoWord B. Chapter 3. Multilayer Perceptrons. Available online at http://www.cnel.ufl.edu/courses/EEL6814/chapter3.pdf (accessed November 2016).
Altmetric. The Altmetric Top 100. 2015. Available online at https://www.altmetric.com/top100/2015/ (accessed December 2015).
Zhang Y, Guo S L, Han L N, Li T L . Application and exploration of big data mining in clinical medicine. Chin Med J (Engl) 2016; 129: 731–738.
Davies F . Numbers behind Numbers: The Altmetric Attention Score and Sources Explained. 2015. Available online at https://www.altmetric.com/blog/scoreanddonut/ (accessed March 2017).
Zhao L, Detlor B, Connelly C E . Sharing Knowledge in Social Q&A Sites: The Unintended Consequences of Extrinsic Motivation. J Manag Inf Syst 2016; 33: 70–100.
Kolahi J, Khazaei S . Post-publication peer review: A fresh perspective on dentistry publications. Dent Hypotheses 2016; 7: 29.
F1000. What is F1000Prime? 2016. Available online at http://f1000.com/prime/about/whatis (accessed March 2017).
Vanlandingham G, Silloway T, Chang V et al. Evidence-Based Policymaking: A guide for effective government. 2014. Available online at http://www.pewtrusts.org/∼/media/assets/2014/11/evidencebasedpolicymakingaguideforeffectivegovernment.pdf (accessed November 2016).
Limoli P . Impact of Social Media on Dental Practices. Dentistry Today. 2012. Available online at http://www.dentistrytoday.com/viewpoint/7719-impact-of-social-media-on-dental-practices (accessed March 2017).
Workman R . The power of social media for dental practices. Dental Economics. Available online at http://www.dentaleconomics.com/articles/print/volume-106/issue-9/practice/the-power-of-social-media.html (accessed March 2017).
Hutson S M . The growing importance of social media for dentists. DentistryIQ. Available online at http://www.dentistryiq.com/articles/2012/12/thegrowingimportanceofsocialmediafor-dentists.html (accessed March 2017).
Bhola S, Hellyer P . The risks and benefits of social media in dental foundation training. BDJ 2016; 221: 609–613.
Kenny P, Johnson I G . Social media use, attitudes, behaviours and perceptions of online professionalism among dental students. BDJ 2016; 221: 651–655.
Neville P, Waylen A . Social media and dentistry: some reflections on eprofessionalism. BDJ 2015; 218: 475–478.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Altmetric LLP (London, U.K), especially Mrs Stacy Konkiel for her valuable assistance and allowing us full access to Altmetric data.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Refereed Paper
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kolahi, J., Iranmanesh, P. & Khazaei, S. Altmetric analysis of 2015 dental literature: a cross sectional survey. Br Dent J 222, 695–699 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2017.408
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2017.408
This article is cited by
-
The online attention to orthodontic research: an Altmetric analysis of the orthodontic journals indexed in the journal citation reports from 2014 to 2018
Progress in Orthodontics (2020)
-
Analysis of highly tweeted dental journals and articles: a science mapping approach
British Dental Journal (2019)
-
Altmetric analysis of contemporary dental literature
British Dental Journal (2018)
-
Top 5 most talked-about BDJ articles of the year
British Dental Journal (2017)