CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 18scientometrics and bibliometrics researchAcademic Writing and PublishingAcademic Publishing and Open Access

Health care articles with simple and declarative titles were more likely to be in the Altmetric Top 100

Di Girolamo, Nicola, Reynders, Reint Meursinge·2017·Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.11.018
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objectives The aim of this study was to assess whether specific title characteristics could influence the likelihood of being included in the "Altmetric Top 100."Methods We conducted a 1:2 matched case-control study with the cases being the health care articles included in the "Altmetric Top 100" lists (2013-2015) matched through a random computerized procedure with two health care articles published in the same journal and year. For each title, we extracted the number of characters in the title, the number of uncommon words, and whether the title was declarative. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals adjusted for a prespecified baseline confounder (open access).Results One hundred eight "Medical and health sciences" articles were retrieved in the 2013-2015 "Altmetric Top 100" and matched to 216 control articles. Titles of the "Altmetric Top 100" articles were 102.6 characters (±42) long, included 3.4 (±2.0) uncommon words, and 29.6% (32/108) were "declarative." Titles of the matched articles were 109.3 characters (±37.1) long, included 4.7 (±2.4) uncommon words, and 21.8% (47/216) were "declarative." After multivariate adjustment, declarative titles with a lower number of uncommon words were significantly more represented in the Altmetric list, with declarative titles having 2.8 times the odds of being in the top list (OR: 2.8; 95% confidence interval: 1.2, 6.4). For each additional uncommon word in the title, there was a 1.4 increase in the odds of being a non-Altmetric Top 100 article (1.4; 1.2-1.6).Conclusion An easy-to-understand, informative title may help bridge the gap between scholar and social media dissemination.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.11.018

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Bolder framing may be a deliberate choice resulting from perverse incentives, when scientists have to convince journals, funding agencies, and the broader public of the importance of their research.

    “At the same time, bolder framing such as this may be a deliberate choice resulting from perverse incentives, when scientists have to convince journals, funding agencies, and the broader public of the importance of their research (14,51,52).”

    From Generic language in scientific communication (2019) · cites this paper as [52]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Di Girolamo, N., & Reynders, R. M.
Affiliations
Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
ORCID
Reynders, Reint Meursinge
Venue
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-05
Volume
85
Pages
32-36
ISSN
0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.11.018
OpenAlex
W2564454635
Cited by
18
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2
FWCI
2.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
Keywords
article titles, title length, social media attention, scholarly communication, open access
MeSH terms
Delivery of Health Care, Humans, Periodicals as Topic, Bibliometrics, Case-Control Studies, Journal Impact Factor

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review