Appreciation of literature by the anaesthetist: A comparison of citations, downloads and Altmetric Attention Score

6Citations
Citations of this article
20Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Different metrics exist to evaluate the impact of a paper. Traditionally, scientific citations are leading, but nowadays new, internet-based, metrics like downloads or Altmetric Attention Score receive increasing attention. We hypothesised a gap between these metrics, reflected by a divergence between scientific and clinical appreciation of anaesthesia literature. Methods: We collected the top 100 most cited and the top 100 most downloaded articles in Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica (AAS) and Anesthesia & Analgesia (A&A) published between 2014 and 2018. We analysed the relationship between the average number of citations per year, downloads per year and Altmetric Attention Score. Results: For both AAS and A&A, a significant correlation between the 100 most cited articles and their downloads (r =.573 and.603, respectively, P

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kampman, J. M., Hermanides, J., Boere, P. R. Q., & Hollmann, M. W. (2020). Appreciation of literature by the anaesthetist: A comparison of citations, downloads and Altmetric Attention Score. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 64(6), 823–828. https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.13575

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free