Published online: 2021-06-30 THIEME Research Article e95 Examining the Relationship between Altmetric Score and Traditional Bibliometrics in the Ophthalmology Literature for 2013 and 2016 Cohorts Zachary C. Wiley, BS1 Carter J. Boyd, BS2 Shivani Ananthasekar, BS2 Nita Bhat, MD3 Shruthi Harish Bindiganavile, MD3 Andrew G. Lee, MD1,3,4,5,6,7,8 1 School of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas Address for correspondence Andrew G. Lee, MD, Department of 2 School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Ophthalmology, Blanton Eye Institute, Houston Methodist Hospital, Birmingham, Alabama 6550 Fannin St, Houston, TX, 77030 3 Department of Ophthalmology, Blanton Eye Institute, Houston (e-mail:
[email protected]). Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas 4 Department of Ophthalmology, Neurology, and Neurosurgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York 5 Department of Ophthalmology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas 6 University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas 7 Texas A and M College of Medicine, Bryan, Texas 8 Department of Ophthalmology, The University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa J Acad Ophthalmol 2021;13:e95–e101. Abstract Background In this study, we reviewed a select sample of ophthalmology literature to determine if there was a correlation between Altimetric and traditional citation-based and impact factor metrics. We hypothesized that Altmetric score would more closely correlate with impact factor and citations in 2016. Methods Journal Citation Reports for the year 2013 was used to find the 15 highest impact factor ophthalmology journals in 2013. Then Elsevier’s Scopus was used to identify the 10 most cited articles from each journal for the years 2013 and 2016.