, Volume 119, Issue 2, pp 827–843 | Cite as

A characterization of professional media and its links to research

  • Diana HicksEmail author
  • Julia Melkers
  • Kimberley R. Isett


The publishing industry is a vast system whose elements form a metaphorical ecosystem with knowledge flowing through connections between heterogeneous elements. In this paper we seek a more robust understanding of different types of literature, and whether and how they support one another in the diffusion of knowledge. We analyze a corpus comprising professional electronic media in US dentistry and its relation to the peer reviewed journal literature. Our corpus includes full text from magazines, news sites and blogs that provide information to clinicians. We find links to research are made through several mechanisms: articles describing new clinical guidelines, referencing, summaries of recently published journal articles and crossover authoring. There is little to no apparent time lag in the diffusion of information from research literature to professional media.


Societal impact Professional media Dentistry Guidelines Blogs CBCT 



This study was supported by the National Institutes of Health (Grant Number U19-DE-22516). The authors are grateful for the feedback provided by Ameet Doshi and Judith Williams. Opinions and assertions contained herein are those of the authors and are not to be construed as necessarily representing the views of the respective organizations or the National Institutes of Health.


  1. Begum, M., Pallari, E., & Lewison, G. (2016). European cancer research: From bench to bedside and to breakfast table. Ecancermedicalscience, 10, ed60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bogdanich, W., & McGinty J. C. (2010). The radiation boom: Radiation worries rise with 3-D dental images. New York Times. November 22, A1.Google Scholar
  3. Bornmann, L. (2015). Alternative metrics in scientometrics: A meta-analysis of research into three altmetrics. Scientometrics, 103(3), 1123–1144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bornmann, L., Haunschild, R., & Marx, W. (2016). Policy documents as sources for measuring societal impact: How often is climate change research mentioned in policy-related documents? Scientometrics, 109(3), 1477–1495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Botello-Harbaum, M. T., Demko, C. A., Curro, F. A., Rindal, D. B., Collie, D., Gilbert, G. H., et al. (2013). Information-seeking behaviors of dental practitioners in three practice-based research networks. Journal of Dental Education, 77(2), 152–160.Google Scholar
  6. Csiszar, A. (2017). How lives became lists and scientific papers became data: Cataloguing authorship during the nineteenth century. The British Journal for the History of Science, 50(1), 23–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Desmarais, B. A., & Hird, J. A. (2014). Public policy’s bibliography: The use of research in US regulatory impact analyses. Regulation & Governance, 8(4), 497–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Elwyn, G., Wieringa, S., & Greenhalgh, T. (2016). Clinical encounters in the post-guidelines era. BMJ, 353, i3200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Funkhouser, E., Agee, B. S., Gordan, V. V., Rindal, D. B., Fellows, J. L., Qvist, V., et al. (2014). Use of online sources of information by dental practitioners: Findings from the dental practice-based research network. Journal of Public Health Dentistry, 74(1), 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Grant, J., Cottrell, R., Cluzeau, F., & Fawcett, G. (2000). Evaluating “payback” on biomedical research from papers cited in clinical guidelines: Applied bibliometric study. BMJ, 320(7242), 1107–1111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hicks, D. (2004). The four literatures of social science. In H. Moed, W. Glänzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology studies (Chapter 21) (pp. 473–496). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  12. Hicks, D., Isett, K. R., & Melkers, J. (2017). Evolving dental media: Implications for evidence based dentistry. Journal of Evidence-Based Practice for the Dental Hygienist. Scholar
  13. Hicks, D., Melkers, M., Barna, J., Isett, K. R., & Gilbert G. H. (2019). Comparison of the accuracy of CBCT radiation effective dose information in peer-reviewed dental journals and dental professional electronic media. General Dentistry (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  14. Hicks, D., & Wang, J. (2013). The New York Times as a resource for mode 2. Science, Technology and Human Values, 38(6), 850–876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kryl, D., Allen, L., Dolby, K., Sherbon, B., & Viney, I. (2012). Tracking the impact of research on policy and practice: Investigating the feasibility of using citations in clinical guidelines for research evaluation. British Medical Journal Open, 2(2), e000897.Google Scholar
  16. Larivière, V., Archambault, É., & Gingras, Y. (2008). Long-term variations in the aging of scientific literature: From exponential growth to steady-state science (1900–2004). Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 59(2), 288–296.Google Scholar
  17. Lenzer, J. (2013). Why we can’t trust clinical guidelines. BMJ, 346, f3830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lewison, G., & Sullivan, R. (2008). The impact of cancer research: How publications influence UK cancer clinical guidelines. British Journal of Cancer, 98(12), 1944–1950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lopez Piñeiro, C., & Hicks, D. (2015). Reception of Spanish sociology by domestic and foreign audiences differs and has consequences for evaluation. Research Evaluation, 24(1), 78–79. Scholar
  20. Melkers, J., Hicks, D., Rosenblum, S., Isett, K. R., & Elliott, J. (2017). Dental blogs, podcasts, and associated social media: Descriptive mapping and analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research. Scholar
  21. Munson, B., & Vujicic, M. (2016) Number of practicing dentists per capita in the United States will grow steadily, research brief. Health Policy Institute, American Dental Association. Accessed May 3, 2018.
  22. Narin, F., Hamilton, K. S., & Olivastro, D. (1997). The increasing linkage between US technology and public science. Research Policy, 26(3), 317–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. National Center for Health Statistics. (2017). Health, United States, 2016: With chartbook on long-term trends in health. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.Google Scholar
  24. Rödder, S., Franzen, M., & Weingart, P. (Eds.). (2011). The sciences’ media connection–public communication and its repercussions (Vol. 28). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  25. Schulze, R. K. W. (2015). Editorial: CBCT special issue. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, 44, 20140380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2016). Are citations from clinical trials evidence of higher impact research? An analysis of Scientometrics, 109(2), 1341–1351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Thelwall, M., Kousha, K., & Abdoli, M. (2017). Is medical research informing professional practice more highly cited? Evidence from AHFS DI Essentials in Scientometrics, 112(1), 509–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Thelwall, M., & Maflahi, N. (2016). Guideline references and academic citations as evidence of the clinical value of health research. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(4), 960–966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. van Raan, A. F. (2017). Patent citations analysis and its value in research evaluation: A review and a new approach to map technology-relevant research. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2(1), 13–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Diana Hicks
    • 1
    Email author
  • Julia Melkers
    • 1
  • Kimberley R. Isett
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Public PolicyGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations