Comparison of Altmetrics with Conventional Bibliometrics in the Surgical Literature (Preprint)

BACKGROUND The impact of a research publication has traditionally been quantified by its citation count. Newer bibliometric indices such as Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) and article page views are emerging as supplementary measures to quantify the academic influence of research. OBJECTIVE The aim of the current study was to interrogate the relationship between novel and traditional bibliometric indices for research published in a leading surgical journal and evaluate the role of these newer indices in measuring the impact of surgical research. METHODS All articles published in JAMA Surgery between 1 January 2019 and 1 September 2021 were examined. The literature database PubMed was used to identify all articles published within the specified time period. The cumulative citation count, AAS, and article page views were retrieved from the journal website. Statistical analysis using the Pearson rank correlation coefficient (r) was performed on Minitab 19. RESULTS : A total of 1,071 articles were retrieved for further analysis. The correlation (95% CI) between ranks for all articles was 0.396 (0.344-0.445) for AAS and citation scores, 0.541 (0.497-0.582) for citations and article page views, and 0.413 (0.362-0.461) for AAS and article page views. CONCLUSIONS We demonstrated a medium correlation between citations and AAS for articles published in a leading surgical journal. The inter-year correlation between 2019 and 2021 was similar, suggesting that AAS could be predictive of future citations. AAS may be useful in evaluating the wider societal impact of the surgical literature and could serve to promote greater public engagement in surgical research.

SP2.2.3How to make the perfect tweet: exploring factors which affect retweetability of surgical research

Aims Twitter is a powerful platform for sharing information. Retweets allow users to reach a wider audience quickly. Our aim was to determine what tweet and twitter-account related factors affect the “retweetability” of surgical publications. Methods All papers published (in print) in Annals of Surgery, BJS and JAMASurgery in 2019 were selected. We identified each paper’s first appearance on Twitter and analysed characteristics of the posting twitter account and the tweet itself. The association between such characteristics and the number of retweets was investigated. Results 413 papers were selected. Median number of retweets was 3 (range, 0-121). The first tweet created about a paper was usually from a reader (42%) with only a minority created by the journal (17%) or the authors (20%). Use of visual abstracts (22/413, p<0.001), pictures (145/413, p<0.001), hashtags (149/413, p<0.001), mentions (183/413, p<0.001), number of followers (p < 0.001), age of twitter account (p = 0.003) and authors as creators of the first tweet (p < 0.001) were associated with higher retweets. When the journal created the first tweet, retweets were also increased (P < 0.001). Posting the title of the paper alone attracted fewer retweets (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis confirmed visual abstracts (p < 0.001), hashtags (p=p.008), pictures (p < 0.001) and authors as creators of the first tweet (p < 0.001) were predictive of increased retweetability. Conclusions Authors and journals should create the first presence on social media to improve engagement with their papers. Such tweets should use visual abstracts or pictures, relevant hashtags and avoid solely posting the paper title to make their research more widely shared.

EP.WE.842Maintaining Recruitment to Surgical Trials during the Pandemic

Aims Recruitment to Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) has traditionally been the domain of Research Nurses. Due to the unprecedented pressures of the COVID pandemic, the majority of Research Nurses have been redeployed to other clinical roles, or those still working within research have had to focus on COVID-related projects. This has left existing surgical trials struggling to recruit. We report on our experience of engaging Specialist Nurses without a research background as well as Consultants and Trainees to support surgical research in these challenging circumstances. Method The Sunflower RCT was first opened to recruitment in August 2019 at our trust. The recruitment was led by single Research Nurse, but the delegation log included a range of Consultants, Trainees, and Specialist Nurses. Due to the COVID pandemic, recruitment was paused from March 2020 and restarted in July 2020. Data were collected on recruitment until January 2021. Results In the seven months before the recruitment pause, 80 patients were recruited (average 11 per month), with the highest proportion of recruits by the sole Research Nurse. Following the recruitment pause, a further 45 patients were recruited (average 7.5 per month). These patients were recruited by Consultants (20, 44%), Specialist Nurses (12, 27%), Trainees (7, 16%), Research Nurse (3, 7%) and postal consents (3, 7%). Conclusions We have demonstrated that surgical research activity can be maintained even with minimal Research Nurse recruitment by engaging all members of the surgical team, especially utilising Specialist Nurses, who may not commonly be approached for such a role.