prikaz prve stranice dokumenta Comparison of media and academic attention of recently published positive and neutral or negative randomized cardiovascular clinical trials
  Download
PDF 709.09 KB
Scientific paper - Original scientific paper
Comparison of media and academic attention of recently published positive and neutral or negative randomized cardiovascular clinical trials
Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, 23 (2022), 1; 031. https://doi.org/10.31083/j.rcm2301031
Skelin, Marko; Katić, Josip; Šarčević, David; Rahelić, Dario; Lucijanić, Marko; Rešić, Arnes; Puljević, Mislav; Javor, Eugen

Institutional repository: Repository of the University of Rijeka, Faculty of Medicine

Cite this document

Skelin, M., Katić, J., Šarčević, D., Rahelić, D., Lucijanić, M., Rešić, A. ... Javor, E. (2022). Comparison of media and academic attention of recently published positive and neutral or negative randomized cardiovascular clinical trials. Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, 23. (1), 1. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2301031

Skelin, Marko, et al. "Comparison of media and academic attention of recently published positive and neutral or negative randomized cardiovascular clinical trials." Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, vol. 23, no. 1, 2022, pp. 1. https://doi.org/10.31083/j.rcm2301031

Skelin, Marko, Josip Katić, David Šarčević, Dario Rahelić, Marko Lucijanić, Arnes Rešić, Mislav Puljević and Eugen Javor. "Comparison of media and academic attention of recently published positive and neutral or negative randomized cardiovascular clinical trials." Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine 23, no. 1 (2022): 1. https://doi.org/10.31083/j.rcm2301031

Skelin, M., et al. (2022) 'Comparison of media and academic attention of recently published positive and neutral or negative randomized cardiovascular clinical trials', Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, 23(1), pp. 1. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2301031

Skelin M, Katić J, Šarčević D, Rahelić D, Lucijanić M, Rešić A, and sur.. Comparison of media and academic attention of recently published positive and neutral or negative randomized cardiovascular clinical trials. Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine [Internet]. 2022 January 18 [cited 2024 December 25];23(1):1. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2301031

M. Skelin, et al., "Comparison of media and academic attention of recently published positive and neutral or negative randomized cardiovascular clinical trials", Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 1, January 2022. [Online]. Available at: https://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:184:043555. [Accessed: 25 December 2024]

Metadata
Title (english)Comparison of media and academic attention of recently published positive and neutral or negative randomized cardiovascular clinical trials
AuthorMarko Skelin
AuthorJosip Katić
AuthorDavid Šarčević
AuthorDario Rahelić
AuthorMarko Lucijanić
AuthorArnes Rešić
AuthorMislav Puljević
AuthorEugen Javor
Author's institutionUniversity of Rijeka
Faculty of Medicine
(Department of Pharmacology)
Scientific / art field,
discipline and subdiscipline		SOCIAL SCIENCES
Information and Communication Sciences
Scientific / art field,
discipline and subdiscipline		BIOMEDICINE AND HEALTHCARE
Clinical Medical Sciences
Abstract (english)
Background: Citations are used to assess the importance of authors, articles and journals in the scientific community, but do not examine how they affect general public journal readership. The Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) is a new metric for measuring media attention of the published paper. Methods: We examined cardiovascular (CV) randomized clinical trials (RCTs), published in the 3 highest Web of Science Impact Factor journals (Journal Citation Reports 2019: category "Medicine, General & Internal") and in the 3 highest Web of Science Impact Factor CV journals (Journal Citation Reports 2019: category "Cardiac & Cardiovascular Systems"), through the calendar year of 2017, 2018 and 2019. The primary outcomes were the assessment of the difference between number of citations and AAS among positive and negative CV RCTs. Results: Among the included 262 RCTs, more positive CV RCTs were published (p = 0.002). There was no significant statistical difference between the positive and negative trials, considering the number of citations (p = 0.61). Interestingly, positive trials had a tendency towards a higher AAS (p = 0.058). The correlation between the AAS and the number of citations was moderate positively correlated (ρ = 0.47, p < 0.001). Conclusion: We did not find any differences between CV RCTs with positive vs CV RCTs with negative results considering the number of their citations. A tendency towards a higher AAS among positive CV RCTs could indicate higher activity on social media regarding CV trials with positive results. A higher number of published positive CV RCTs among all published CV RCTs could indicate the presence of publication bias but further investigation of unpublished RCTs in trial registries (e.g., clinicaltrials.gov) is needed.
Keywords (english)
Languageenglish
Publication typeScientific paper - Original scientific paper
Publication statusPublished
Peer reviewPeer review - international
Publication versionPublished version
Journal titleReviews in Cardiovascular Medicine
Numberingvol. 23, no. 1, p. 1, 031
p-ISSN1530-6550
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.31083/j.rcm2301031
URN:NBNurn:nbn:hr:184:043555
Publication2022-01-18
Document URLhttps://imrpress.com/journal/RCM/23/1/10.31083/j.rcm2301031
Type of resourceText
Access conditionsOpen access
Terms of useLicence Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) icon
Created on2022-02-01 12:51:16