No abstract

No abstract

The association between mention of scientific research in popular media (e.g., the mainstream media or social media platforms) and scientific impact (e.g., citations) has yet to be fully explored. The purpose of this study was to clarify this relationship, while accounting for some other factors that likely influence scientific impact (e.g., the reputations of the scientists conducting the research and academic journal in which the research was published). To accomplish this purpose, approximately 800 peer-reviewed articles describing original research were evaluated for scientific impact, popular media attention, and reputations of the scientists/authors and publication venue. A structural equation model was produced describing the relationship between non-scientific impact (popular media) and scientific impact (citations), while accounting for author/scientist and journal reputation. The resulting model revealed a strong association between the amount of popular media attention given to a scientific research project and corresponding publication and the number of times that publication is cited in peer-reviewed scientific literature. These results indicate that (1) peerreviewed scientific publications receiving more attention in non-scientific media are more likely to be cited than scientific publications receiving less popular media attention, and (2) the non-scientific media is associated with the scientific agenda. These results may inform scientists who increasingly use popular media to inform the general public and scientists concerning their scientific work. These results might also inform administrators of higher education and research funding mechanisms, who base decisions partly on scientific impact.

No abstract

Purpose: Greater articular cartilage T1ρ magnetic resonance imaging relaxation times indicate less proteoglycan density and are linked to posttraumatic osteoarthritis development after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Although changes in T1ρ relaxation times are associated with gait biomechanics, it is unclear if excessive or insufficient knee joint loading is linked to greater T1ρ relaxation times 12 months post-ACLR. The purpose of this study was to compare external knee adduction (KAM) and flexion (KFM) moments in individuals after ACLR with high versus low tibiofemoral T1ρ relaxation profiles and uninjured controls. Methods: Gait biomechanics were collected in 26 uninjured controls (50% females; age, 22 ± 4 yr; body mass index, 23.9 ± 2.8 kg•m −2 ) and 26 individuals after ACLR (50% females; age, 22 ± 4 yr; body mass index, 24.2 ± 3.5 kg•m −2 ) at 6 and 12 months post-ACLR. ACLR-T1ρ High (n = 9) and ACLR-T1ρ Low (n = 17) groups were created based on 12-month post-ACLR T1ρ relaxation times using a k-means cluster analysis. Functional analyses of variance were used to compare KAM and KFM. Results: ACLR-T1ρ High exhibited lesser KAM than ACLR-T1ρ Low and uninjured controls 6 months post-ACLR. ACLR-T1ρ Low exhibited greater KAM than uninjured controls 6 and 12 months post-ACLR. KAM increased in ACLR-T1ρ High and decreased in ACLR-T1ρ Low between 6 and 12 months, both groups becoming more similar to uninjured controls. There were scant differences in KFM between ACLR-T1ρ High and ACLR-T1ρ Low 6 or 12 months post-ACLR, but both groups demonstrated lesser KFM compared with uninjured controls. Conclusions: Associations between worse T1ρ profiles and increases in KAM may be driven by the normalization of KAM in individuals who initially exhibit insufficient KAM 6 months post-ACLR.