(002) Use of Bibliometrics and Altmetrics in Research Impact Assessment of the Canadian Network for Observational Drug Effect Studies: Preliminary Observations
Professor Dalhousie University College of Pharmacy, Dalhousie University Halifax, Canada
Background: The Canadian Network for Observational Drug Effect Studies (CNODES, www.cnodes.ca) is distributed across seven Canadian provinces. Its research focuses on the benefits and risks of drugs post-marketing using Canadian, US, and UK population-based administrative and other healthcare data. Research findings are relevant to drug regulators, plan managers, clinicians, researchers, and others.
Objectives: This study used bibliometrics and altmetrics to measure the research output of CNODES and its impact in science and beyond. We examined the characteristics of CNODES authors and publications to highlight the network’s contribution to gender parity, training, and open science.
Methods: We used OpenAlex (www.openalex.org) to collect metadata for the 93 CNODES publications archived in McGill University’s digital repository (www.escholarship.mcgill.ca) and published between 2012 and 2021. We used all publications (n=236,319) with a citation relationship (citation, co-citation, shared reference) to CNODES work as a benchmark to assess the impact of CNODES work as measured by citations, as well as mentions in social media, the news, and policy documents collected through the Altmetric API (www.altmetric.com). We analyzed the contribution of women and trainees to CNODES output.
Results: We found that CNODES research had, on average, a citation impact slightly below the benchmark but that CNODES did produce high-impact research with nine publications in the 10% most cited. CNODES work was mentioned more than 2.4 times the average paper on Twitter, with three publications in the top 1% most tweeted and 22 in the top 10%. CNODES publications had good visibility in news outlets, with 10% more mentions than the average paper and 12 publications in the top decile. We found a substantial impact of CNODES' work on policy with three publications in the top decile. While about half of CNODES authors were women, men accounted for two-thirds of authorships and were overrepresented in leading authorship positions. Trainees accounted for 28% of first authorships, highlighting the contribution of CNODES to the training and mentorship of junior researchers.
Conclusions: This study shows how bibliometrics and altmetrics can be used to examine the research output, author characteristics, and impact of a research unit such as CNODES using mainly open data sources. It can guide other pharmacoepidemiology researchers and units who wish to assess engagement with their work within and beyond academia.