Abstract
In academic publishing, citation counts, h-indices, and journal impact factors have long reigned supreme and have become the default currency of academic success. But as the ecosystem of scientific communication rapidly evolves—driven by open access publishing, social media, and increasing public engagement with science—these traditional metrics are no longer enough to capture the full picture of research impact. Perhaps this shift is even more relevant in the field of traditional, complementary, and integrative medicine (TCIM), where public interest often outpaces scholarly consensus and where online visibility may shape health behavior as much as evidence hierarchies.
In our recently published article, titled “An Altmetric Analysis of the Research Literature About Traditional, Complementary, and Integrative Medicine”, we shed new light on this evolution in research influence. 1 We examined over 62,000 scholarly outputs indexed under the TCIM subject area in Altmetric.com, 2 and we believe that our study offers the most comprehensive picture to date of how TCIM research circulates online. The findings are striking—and they prompt a critical reconsideration of what we mean by “impact.”
From Metrics to Meaning: What Altmetrics Tell Us
Altmetrics is a term that lacks a common definition; 3 however, it has been defined as the “study and use of scholarly impact measures based on activity in online tools and environments’ to describe web-based metrics for the impact of publications and other scholarly material by using data from social media platforms” by Jason Priem, who coined the term. 4 Altmetrics are often misunderstood, and some critics dismiss them as vanity indicators or easily gamed signals of popularity. While it is true that altmetrics are susceptible to manipulation (for instance, through automated bots on social media), 5,6 they also provide real-time insights into the reach, resonance, and relevance of research beyond academic silos. 5
In the context of TCIM, this is especially important. Many TCIM modalities, including acupuncture, herbal medicine, and mindfulness, exist at the intersection of science, culture, and public interest. They are widely used by patients, increasingly integrated into health systems, and frequently debated in the media. As such, understanding how these topics are discussed online is essential to understanding their broader societal impact.
The data from our own altmetric analysis 1 suggest that TCIM research is already engaging large online audiences, but whether that engagement is accurate, constructive, and aligned with evidence-based messages remains an open question. What is clear is that altmetrics give us the tools to ask and begin to answer those questions.
The Rise of the Social Layer in Research Dissemination
Online platforms, particularly X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, and news media, now play an increasingly dominant role in disseminating scientific research. These spaces, once peripheral to academic discourse, are quickly becoming central arenas for the public communication of science. 7 For TCIM, which sits at the crossroads of conventional health care and community-based knowledge systems, these platforms offer a way to reach diverse, engaged audiences.
In addition to serving as vehicles for disseminating research findings, social media platforms have become powerful tools for sharing user and practitioner beliefs, attitudes, and lived experiences related to TCIM. Moreover, growing evidence suggests that social media can serve as a viable, accessible, and effective platform for delivering TCIM therapies and health-related information. 8 From guided mindfulness sessions streamed live to herbal medicine education campaigns on Instagram, digital platforms are not only broadcasting TCIM content, but they are also becoming part of the therapeutic ecosystem themselves.
Rethinking the Role of Journals and Researchers
Given this broader understanding of research impact, journals and the researchers who publish in them must reconsider how they think about visibility and influence. Publishing high-quality, peer-reviewed research is the foundation, but ensuring that research is accessible and discoverable is just as important for impact. This does not mean we should abandon established and rigorous methods of evaluating research, nor does this mean prioritizing popularity over quality. Rather, it means embracing an approach that values both scholarly impact and public engagement.
Here are a few practical ways we think publishers, journals, editors, and researchers can rise to this challenge: Encourage Social Media Dissemination: Authors should be encouraged (or even supported) to share their work on social media platforms, accompanied by context-rich threads or visuals that enhance interpretation. Foster Media Partnerships: Where appropriate, collaborating with health journalists and communication professionals can help amplify key findings while ensuring they are accurately represented. Mandate ORCID and Keywords for Discoverability: Ensuring that articles are properly tagged and linked to author profiles improves indexing and boosts online visibility through search engines and bibliographic databases. Promote Global Equity in Access and Authorship: Actively supporting submissions from low- and middle-income countries, waiving article processing fees where possible, and publishing regionally relevant content can expand the global impact of TCIM research.
A Call to Action
If we want TCIM research to inform not only the academic community but also clinical guidelines, health policy, and individual decision-making, we must engage with the platforms where these decisions are shaped. Altmetrics offer a window into that broader engagement and a mirror for our own practices. Let us not dismiss this mirror but learn from it. As researchers, editors, and advocates for rigorous and impactful TCIM scholarship, we must meet audiences where they are. Sometimes, that means on social media. Sometimes, that means in the news. And always, it means beyond citations and the impact factor.