Measuring the impact of scientific publications and publication extenders: examples of novel approaches.

Different stakeholders, such as authors, research institutions, and healthcare professionals (HCPs) may determine the impact of peer-reviewed publications in different ways. Commonly-used measures of research impact, such as the Journal Impact Factor or the H-index, are not designed to evaluate the impact of individual articles. They are heavily dependent on citations, and therefore only measure impact of the overall journal or researcher respectively, taking months or years to accrue. The past decade has seen the development of article-level metrics (ALMs), that measure the online attention received by an individual publication in contexts including social media platforms, news media, citation activity, and policy and patent citations. These new tools can complement traditional bibliometric data and provide a more holistic evaluation of the impact of a publication. This commentary discusses the need for ALMs, and summarizes several examples - PlumX Metrics, Altmetric, the Better Article Metrics score, the EMPIRE Index, and scite. We also discuss how metrics may be used to evaluate the value of "publication extenders" - educational microcontent such as animations, videos and plain-language summaries that are often hosted on HCP education platforms. Publication extenders adapt a publication's key data to audience needs and thereby extend a publication's reach. These new approaches have the potential to address the limitations of traditional metrics, but the diversity of new metrics requires that users have a keen understanding of which forms of impact are relevant to a specific publication and select and monitor ALMs accordingly.

Different readers have different ways of deciding how important scientific articles are. The usual methods used to measure the impact of research, like the Journal Impact Factor or the H-index, are not meant to measure this for individual articles. These methods mainly look at how many times the articles are mentioned by others, and it can take a long time to see the impact.But in the past ten years, new tools called article-level metrics (ALMs) have been created. These tools measure how much attention an article gets online, like on social media, in the news, or when other researchers talk about it. ALMs are better at explaining how important a specific article is. They can work together with the usual methods to measure impact.This paper talks about why ALMs are important and gives examples of these tools, like PlumX Metrics, Altmetric, the Better Article Metrics score, the EMPIRE Index, and scite. It also explains how these tools can help us see the value of animations, videos, or summaries in simple language. These make it easier for more people to understand and learn from the articles.These new ways of measuring impact can help us see how important articles are in a more complete way. But because there are many different ways to measure this, it's important for users to understand which methods are relevant for a specific article and keep track of them.

Benefits of using customized instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty: results from an activity-based costing model.

OBJECTIVE: The growing demand for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) associated with the efforts to contain healthcare expenditure by advanced economies necessitates the use of economically effective technologies in TKA. The present analysis based on activity-based costing (ABC) model was carried out to estimate the economic value of patient-matched instrumentation (PMI) compared to standard surgical instrumentation in TKA. METHODOLOGY: The costs of the two approaches, PMI and standard instrumentation in TKA, were determined by the use of ABC which measures the cost of a particular procedure by determining the activities involved and adding the cost of each activity. Improvement in productivity due to increased operating room (OR) turn-around times was determined and potential additional revenue to the hospital by the efficient utilization of gained OR time was estimated. RESULTS: Increased efficiency in the usage of OR and utilization of surgical trays were noted with patient-specific approach. Potential revenues to the hospital were estimated with the use of PMI by efficient utilization of time saved in OR. Additional revenues of 78,240 per year were estimated considering utilization of gained OR time to perform surgeries other than TKA. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis suggests that use of PMI in TKA is economically effective when compared to standard instrumentation.