Cargando…

Altmetrics Attention Scores for Randomized Controlled Trials in Total Joint Arthroplasty Are Reflective of High Scientific Quality: An Altmetrics-Based Methodological Quality and Bias Analysis

The Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) has been associated with citation rates across medical and surgical disciplines. However, factors that drive high AAS remain poorly understood and there remains multiple pitfalls to correlating these metrics alone with the quality of a study. The purpose of the cu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kunze, Kyle N., Richardson, Michelle, Bernstein, David N., Premkumar, Ajay, Piuzzi, Nicolas S., McLawhorn, Alexander S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7714052/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33278182
http://dx.doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-20-00187
_version_ 1783618671475687424
author Kunze, Kyle N.
Richardson, Michelle
Bernstein, David N.
Premkumar, Ajay
Piuzzi, Nicolas S.
McLawhorn, Alexander S.
author_facet Kunze, Kyle N.
Richardson, Michelle
Bernstein, David N.
Premkumar, Ajay
Piuzzi, Nicolas S.
McLawhorn, Alexander S.
author_sort Kunze, Kyle N.
collection PubMed
description The Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) has been associated with citation rates across medical and surgical disciplines. However, factors that drive high AAS remain poorly understood and there remains multiple pitfalls to correlating these metrics alone with the quality of a study. The purpose of the current study was to determine the relationship between methodologic and study biases and the AAS in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in total joint arthroplasty journals. METHODS: All RCTs from 2016 published in The Journal of Arthroplasty, The Bone and Joint Journal, The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Clinical Orthopedics and Related Research, The Journal of Knee Surgery, Hip International, and Acta Orthopaedica were extracted. Methodologic bias was graded with the JADAD scale, whereas study bias was graded with the Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCTs. Publication characteristics, social media attention (Facebook, Twitter, and Mendeley), AAS, citation rates, and bias were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 42 articles were identified. The mean (±SD) citations and AAS per RCT was 17.8 ± 16.5 (range, 0 to 78) and 8.0 ± 15.4 (range, 0 to 64), respectively. The mean JADAD score was 2.6 ± 0.94. No statistically significant differences were observed in the JADAD score or total number of study biases when compared across the seven journals (P = 0.57 and P = 0.27). Higher JADAD scores were significantly associated with higher AAS scores (β = 6.7, P = 0.006) but not citation rate (P = 0.16). The mean number of study biases was 2.0 ± 0.93 (range, 0 to 4). A greater total number of study biases was significantly with higher AAS scores (β = −8.0, P < 0.001) but not citation rate (P = 0.10). The AAS was a significant and positive predictor of citation rate (β = 0.43, P = 0.019). CONCLUSION: High methodologic quality and limited study bias markedly contribute to the AAS of RCTs in the total joint arthroplasty literature. The AAS may be used as a proxy measure of scientific quality for RCTs, although readers should still critically appraise these articles before making changes to clinical practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7714052
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Wolters Kluwer
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77140522020-12-03 Altmetrics Attention Scores for Randomized Controlled Trials in Total Joint Arthroplasty Are Reflective of High Scientific Quality: An Altmetrics-Based Methodological Quality and Bias Analysis Kunze, Kyle N. Richardson, Michelle Bernstein, David N. Premkumar, Ajay Piuzzi, Nicolas S. McLawhorn, Alexander S. J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev Research Article The Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) has been associated with citation rates across medical and surgical disciplines. However, factors that drive high AAS remain poorly understood and there remains multiple pitfalls to correlating these metrics alone with the quality of a study. The purpose of the current study was to determine the relationship between methodologic and study biases and the AAS in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in total joint arthroplasty journals. METHODS: All RCTs from 2016 published in The Journal of Arthroplasty, The Bone and Joint Journal, The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Clinical Orthopedics and Related Research, The Journal of Knee Surgery, Hip International, and Acta Orthopaedica were extracted. Methodologic bias was graded with the JADAD scale, whereas study bias was graded with the Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCTs. Publication characteristics, social media attention (Facebook, Twitter, and Mendeley), AAS, citation rates, and bias were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 42 articles were identified. The mean (±SD) citations and AAS per RCT was 17.8 ± 16.5 (range, 0 to 78) and 8.0 ± 15.4 (range, 0 to 64), respectively. The mean JADAD score was 2.6 ± 0.94. No statistically significant differences were observed in the JADAD score or total number of study biases when compared across the seven journals (P = 0.57 and P = 0.27). Higher JADAD scores were significantly associated with higher AAS scores (β = 6.7, P = 0.006) but not citation rate (P = 0.16). The mean number of study biases was 2.0 ± 0.93 (range, 0 to 4). A greater total number of study biases was significantly with higher AAS scores (β = −8.0, P < 0.001) but not citation rate (P = 0.10). The AAS was a significant and positive predictor of citation rate (β = 0.43, P = 0.019). CONCLUSION: High methodologic quality and limited study bias markedly contribute to the AAS of RCTs in the total joint arthroplasty literature. The AAS may be used as a proxy measure of scientific quality for RCTs, although readers should still critically appraise these articles before making changes to clinical practice. Wolters Kluwer 2020-12-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7714052/ /pubmed/33278182 http://dx.doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-20-00187 Text en Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Kunze, Kyle N.
Richardson, Michelle
Bernstein, David N.
Premkumar, Ajay
Piuzzi, Nicolas S.
McLawhorn, Alexander S.
Altmetrics Attention Scores for Randomized Controlled Trials in Total Joint Arthroplasty Are Reflective of High Scientific Quality: An Altmetrics-Based Methodological Quality and Bias Analysis
title Altmetrics Attention Scores for Randomized Controlled Trials in Total Joint Arthroplasty Are Reflective of High Scientific Quality: An Altmetrics-Based Methodological Quality and Bias Analysis
title_full Altmetrics Attention Scores for Randomized Controlled Trials in Total Joint Arthroplasty Are Reflective of High Scientific Quality: An Altmetrics-Based Methodological Quality and Bias Analysis
title_fullStr Altmetrics Attention Scores for Randomized Controlled Trials in Total Joint Arthroplasty Are Reflective of High Scientific Quality: An Altmetrics-Based Methodological Quality and Bias Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Altmetrics Attention Scores for Randomized Controlled Trials in Total Joint Arthroplasty Are Reflective of High Scientific Quality: An Altmetrics-Based Methodological Quality and Bias Analysis
title_short Altmetrics Attention Scores for Randomized Controlled Trials in Total Joint Arthroplasty Are Reflective of High Scientific Quality: An Altmetrics-Based Methodological Quality and Bias Analysis
title_sort altmetrics attention scores for randomized controlled trials in total joint arthroplasty are reflective of high scientific quality: an altmetrics-based methodological quality and bias analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7714052/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33278182
http://dx.doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-20-00187
work_keys_str_mv AT kunzekylen altmetricsattentionscoresforrandomizedcontrolledtrialsintotaljointarthroplastyarereflectiveofhighscientificqualityanaltmetricsbasedmethodologicalqualityandbiasanalysis
AT richardsonmichelle altmetricsattentionscoresforrandomizedcontrolledtrialsintotaljointarthroplastyarereflectiveofhighscientificqualityanaltmetricsbasedmethodologicalqualityandbiasanalysis
AT bernsteindavidn altmetricsattentionscoresforrandomizedcontrolledtrialsintotaljointarthroplastyarereflectiveofhighscientificqualityanaltmetricsbasedmethodologicalqualityandbiasanalysis
AT premkumarajay altmetricsattentionscoresforrandomizedcontrolledtrialsintotaljointarthroplastyarereflectiveofhighscientificqualityanaltmetricsbasedmethodologicalqualityandbiasanalysis
AT piuzzinicolass altmetricsattentionscoresforrandomizedcontrolledtrialsintotaljointarthroplastyarereflectiveofhighscientificqualityanaltmetricsbasedmethodologicalqualityandbiasanalysis
AT mclawhornalexanders altmetricsattentionscoresforrandomizedcontrolledtrialsintotaljointarthroplastyarereflectiveofhighscientificqualityanaltmetricsbasedmethodologicalqualityandbiasanalysis