Descriptive analysis demonstrates significant correlations between social networks and bibliometric metrics in the Andean Community of Nations.
Objective. Our goal was to analyze the use and impact of traditional and academic social networks on the visibility, dissemination, and impact metrics of scientific journals indexed in Scopus from countries in the Andean Community of Nations from 2020 to 2024. Design/Methodology/Approach. A descriptive, comparative, and cross-sectional study was conducted. The sample comprised 81 scientific journals from Colombia, Peru, Ecuador, and Bolivia, identified through various databases, including Latindex, SciELO, and national indexing systems. Their presence on both conventional (X, Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, and TikTok) and academic (ResearchGate) social networks was analyzed using content analysis, engagement metrics, sentiment analysis, and correlation with bibliometric indicators. Results/Discussion. Eighty-nine percent of the journals are on X, 45.7% on Facebook, and 34.6% on ResearchGate. Colombia accounts for 55.6% of the journals, followed by Peru (22.2%), Ecuador (14.8%), and Bolivia (7.4%). A significant correlation was found between the h-index and followers on X (r = 0.67), as well as between mentions on social networks and traditional citations (r = 0.71). Instagram showed the highest level of engagement at 7.1%. Conclusions. Social networks increase regional scientific visibility, with X being a major platform and academic networks closely connected to impact metrics. It is advisable to implement integrated digital strategies. Originality/Value. The study presents an innovative approach by combining bibliometric and altmetric metrics, highlighting the strategic role of social networks in the scientific communication of the Andean Community of Nations, and provides empirical evidence to support digital editorial policies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
González et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: