Document Type : Articles


1 Assistant Professor, Payame Noor University, Iran.

2 PhD, Knowledge and Information Science, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran.


This study aimed to identify the effect of Altmetrics indicators of Mendeley resource management database on scientometric indicators in Scopus and Web of Science citation databases. The present study is an applied and descriptive research that has been done by scientometric method with Altmetrics approach. The statistical sample for the study includes Iranian researchers in the field of nursing who had an indexed document in the Scopus citation database, in the period 2000-2019 and on the date of the research (20/03/2020), and was also a member of the Mendeley resource management database. There were 158 high-profile authors introduced by Scopus. Findings illustrated that there is no significant relationship between the h-index in Scopus and the followers' index in Mendeley. However, there is a significant relationship between the other indicators studied in these two databases. There is also a significant relationship between co-authorship index, h-index, citations, readers, publications, and viewers in Mendeley scientific social network with indexes of citation number and h-index in the Web of Science citation database. But there is no significant relationship between the follower’s index and these indicators. Examining the relationship between the numbers of citations received in Mendeley, Scopus, and Web of Science shows that there is a significant relationship between the numbers of citations received in these databases. Respectively, the strongest correlation, in this case, is between the citation index received in the Mendeley and Web of Science database, Mendeley and Scopus, and finally Scopus and Web of science. There is also a significant relationship between the etch index in the Mendeley, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. The correlation between the Mendeley h-index and Web of Science is stronger than the correlation between the Mendeley h-index and Scopus.  


  1. Abdelraheem, Ahmed Yousif. (2013). University students’ use of social networks sites and their relation with some variables. Presented at the WEI International Academic Conference Proceedings.
  2. Adie, Euan; & Roe, William. (2013). Altmetric: Enriching scholarly content with article-level discussion and metrics. Learned Publishing, 26(1), 11–17.
  3. Ansari, Masoumeh; Fallah, Mohammad; Noruzi, Alireza; & Rasolabadi, Masoud. (2019). Comparing the Presence of Researchers of Medical Universities of Western Provinces of Iran on ResearchGate and Scopus. Webology, 16(2), 257–274.
  4. Bardus, Marco; Rassi, Rola El; Chahrour, Mohamad; Akl, Elie W.; Raslan, Abdul Sattar; Meho, Lokman I.; & Akl, Elie A. (2020). The Use of Social Media to Increase the Impact of Health Research: Systematic Review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(7), e15607.
  5. Bar-Ilan (Deceased), Judit; & Halevi, Gali. (2020). The Altmetrics of Henk Moed’s Publications. In C. Daraio & W. Glänzel (eds.), (C. Daraio & W. Glänzel, eds.), Evaluative Informetrics: The Art of Metrics-Based Research Assessment : Festschrift in Honour of Henk F. Moed (pp. 327-340). Springer International Publishing.
  6. Belli, Simone. (2019). Effects of Digital Transformation in Scientific Collaboration. A Bibliographic Review. In H. Florez, M. Leon, J. M. Diaz-Nafria, & S. Belli (eds.), (H. Florez, M. Leon, J. M. Diaz-Nafria, & S. Belli, eds.), Applied Informatics (pp. 410-422). Springer International Publishing.
  7. Biranvand, A., Samie, M., Rahmaniyan, S. (2021). Investigating the Relationships between Activity of Iranian Producers in the Field of Business Management in Social Networks with the Scientometric Indices of Databases.. Knowledge Studies, 7(26), -. doi: 10.22054/jks.2021.58283.1409
  8. Biranvand, A. (2021). Investigating the relationship between Altmetric Scores of highly cited articles in the field of particle physics and citations received in databases. Journal of Studies in Library and Information Science, (), -. doi: 10.22055/slis.2021.36442.1819
  9. Carpenter, Julie. (2012). Researchers of Tomorrow: The research behaviour of Generation Y doctoral students. Information services & use, 3-17. Retrieved from:
  10. Donato, H. (2014). Traditional and alternative metrics: The full story of impact.
  11. Doulani A, Shabani Z, Baradar R. Information Science Academic Members of Iranian Public Universities Sharing Information Resources in ResearchGate Social Scientific Network: It’s Relation on their Scientific Output in Scopus Database and Google Scholar Search Engine. payavard. 2020; 14 (1) :53-64
  12. Haustein, Stefanie. (2019). Scholarly Twitter Metrics. In W. Glanzel, H. F. Moed, U. Schmoch, & M. Thelwall (eds.), (W. Glanzel, H. F. Moed, U. Schmoch, & M. Thelwall, eds.), Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators (pp. 729-760). Springer International Publishing.
  13. Mason, Shannon. (2020). Adoption and usage of Academic Social Networks: a Japan case study. Scientometrics, 122(3), 1751-1767.
  14. Mohammadi, Ehsan; & Thelwall, Mike. (2014). Mendeley readership altmetrics for the social sciences and humanities: Research evaluation and knowledge flows. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 65(8), 1627-1638. Retrieved from
  15. Priem, Jason; Piwowar, Heather A; & Hemminger, Bradley M. (2012). Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact. arXiv preprint arXiv:1203.4745.
  16. Priem, Jason; Taraborelli, Dario; Groth, Paul; & Neylon, Cameron. (2010). Altmetrics: a manifesto. Altmetrics. Retrieved online from, http://altmetrics. Org/manifesto.
  17. Riahinia, Nosrat; Rahimi, Forough; Jahangiri, Maryam; Mirhaghjoo, Saideh; & Alinezhad, Fatemeh. (2018). Traditional Citation Indexes and Alternative Metrics of Readership. International Journal of Information Science and Management (IJISM), 16(2). Retrieved from
  18. Robinson-Garcia, Nicolas; Torres-Salinas, Daniel; Zahedi, Zohreh; & Costas, Rodrigo. (2014). New data, new possibilities: exploring the insides of Altmetric. Com. arXiv preprint arXiv: 1408.0135.
  19. Ruan, Qing Zhao; Chen, Austin D.; Cohen, Justin B.; Singhal, Dhruv; Lin, Samuel J.; & Lee, Bernard T. (2018). Alternative Metrics of Scholarly Output: The Relationship among Altmetric Score, Mendeley Reader Score, Citations, and Downloads in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 141(3), 801-809.
  20. Salimi, Elham (2005). Evaluation of Iranian researcher’s products in Research Gate and Scopus citation database by Altmetrix method. MA. Dissertation, Alzahra University, Tehran.
  21. Sugimoto, Cassidy R; Work, Sam; Lariviere, Vincent; & Haustein, Stefanie. (2017). Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: A review of the literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(9), 2037–2062.
  22. Tenopir, Carol; Allard, Suzie; Douglass, Kimberly; Aydinoglu, Arsev Umur; Wu, Lei; Read, Eleanor; Manoff, Maribeth; & Frame, Mike. (2011). Data Sharing by Scientists: Practices and Perceptions. PLOS ONE, 6(6), e21101.
  23. Tenopir, Carol; Volentine, Rachel; & King, Donald W. (2013). Social media and scholarly reading. Online Information Review, 37(2), 193-216.
  24. Thelwall, Mike; & Kousha, Kayvan. (2015). ResearchGate: Disseminating, communicating, and measuring Scholarship? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(5).
  25. Thelwall, Mike; & Kousha, Kayvan. (2017). ResearchGate versus Google Scholar: Which finds more early citations? Scientometrics, 112(2), 1125-1131.
  26. Van Noorden, Richard. (2014). Online collaboration: Scientists and the social network. Nature, 512(7513).
  27. Vine, Rita. (2006). Google Scholar. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 94(1), 97-99. Retrieved from
  28. Weisgerber, C; & Butler, S. (2010). Editor’s introduction: Special issue on communication pedagogy in the age of social media. Electronic Journal of Communication, 20(1-2), 1.
  29. Weller, Katrin. (2015). Social Media and Altmetrics: An Overview of Current Alternative Approaches to Measuring Scholarly Impact. In I. M. Welpe, J. Wollersheim, S. Ringelhan, & M. Osterloh (eds.), (I. M. Welpe, J. Wollersheim, S. Ringelhan, & M. Osterloh, eds.), Incentives and Performance: Governance of Research Organizations (pp. 261-276). Springer International Publishing.
  30. Weller, Katrin; & Puschmann, Cornelius. (2011). Twitter for Scientific Communication: How Can Citations/References be Identified and Measured. In Proceedings of the ACM WebSci’11. Retrieved from
  31. Williams, Ann E. (2017). Altmetrics: an overview and evaluation. Online Information Review, 41(3), 311-317.
  32. Wouters, Paul; Zahedi, Zohreh; & Costas, Rodrigo. (2019). Social Media Metrics for New Research Evaluation. In W. Glänzel, H. F. Moed, U. Schmoch, & M. Thelwall (eds.), (W. Glänzel, H. F. Moed, U. Schmoch, & M. Thelwall, eds.), Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators (pp. 687-713). Springer International Publishing.
  33. Zahedi, Zohreh; Fenner, Martin; & Costas, Rodrigo. (2014). How consistent are altmetrics providers? Study of 1000 PLOS ONE publications using the PLOS ALM, Mendeley and Altmetric. com APIs. In Altmetrics 14. Workshop at the Web Science Conference, Bloomington, USA.