Wikipedia as a gateway to biomedical research: The relative distribution and use of citations in the English Wikipedia

Wikipedia is a gateway to knowledge. However, the extent to which this gateway ends at Wikipedia or continues via supporting citations is unknown. Wikipedia’s gateway functionality has implications for information design and education, notably in medicine. This study aims to establish benchmarks for the relative distribution and referral (click) rate of citations—as indicated by presence of a Digital Object Identifier (DOI)—from Wikipedia, with a focus on medical citations. DOIs referred from the English Wikipedia in August 2016 were obtained from Crossref.org. Next, based on a DOI’s presence on a WikiProject Medicine page, all DOIs in Wikipedia were categorized as medical (WP:MED) or non-medical (non-WP:MED). Using this categorization, referred DOIs were classified as WP:MED, non-WP:MED, or BOTH, meaning the DOI may have been referred from either category. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Out of 5.2 million Wikipedia pages, 4.42% (n = 229,857) included at least one DOI. 68,870 were identified as WP:MED, with 22.14% (n = 15,250) featuring one or more DOIs. WP:MED pages featured on average 8.88 DOI citations per page, whereas non-WP:MED pages had on average 4.28 DOI citations. For DOIs only on WP:MED pages, a DOI was referred every 2,283 pageviews and for non-WP:MED pages every 2,467 pageviews. DOIs from BOTH pages accounted for 12% (n = 58,475). The referral of DOI citations found in BOTH could not be assigned to WP:MED or non-WP:MED, as the page from which the referral was made was not provided with the data. While these results cannot provide evidence of greater citation referral from WP:MED than non-WP:MED, they do provide benchmarks to assess strategies for changing referral patterns. These changes might include editors adopting new methods for designing and presenting citations or the introduction of teaching strategies that address the value of consulting citations as a tool for extending learning.

[1]  C. Ramsey,et al.  Eye lens radiocarbon reveals centuries of longevity in the Greenland shark (Somniosus microcephalus) , 2016, Science.

[2]  Jonathan Wareham,et al.  Junior physician's use of Web 2.0 for information seeking and medical education: A qualitative study , 2009, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[3]  Andrew G. West,et al.  Wikipedia and Medicine: Quantifying Readership, Editors, and the Significance of Natural Language , 2015, Journal of medical Internet research.

[4]  Laura L Moorhead,et al.  Qualitative study of physicians' varied uses of biomedical research in the USA , 2016, BMJ Open.

[5]  C. Blakemore,et al.  Development of a rational scale to assess the harm of drugs of potential misuse , 2007, The Lancet.

[6]  Gregory Makoul,et al.  Patient preferences for shared decisions: a systematic review. , 2012, Patient education and counseling.

[7]  The significance of volcanic eruption strength and frequency for climate , 2004 .

[8]  D. Sackett,et al.  Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't , 1996, BMJ.

[9]  Michaël,et al.  Seeking health information online: does Wikipedia matter? , 2009, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[10]  Influence of wikipedia and other web resources on acute and critical care decisions. a web-based survey , 2015, Intensive Care Medicine Experimental.

[11]  L. Maggio,et al.  In an Age of Open Access to Research Policies: Physician and Public Health NGO Staff Research Use and Policy Awareness , 2015, PloS one.

[12]  M. Prins,et al.  Fixed dose subcutaneous low molecular weight heparins versus adjusted dose unfractionated heparin for venous thromboembolism. , 2000, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[13]  James M Heilman,et al.  Wikipedia: A Key Tool for Global Public Health Promotion , 2011, Journal of medical Internet research.

[14]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Why We Read Wikipedia , 2017, WWW.

[15]  Jake Orlowitz,et al.  Why Medical Schools Should Embrace Wikipedia: Final-Year Medical Student Contributions to Wikipedia Articles for Academic Credit at One School , 2016, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[16]  Bridget C. O’Brien,et al.  Access of primary and secondary literature by health personnel in an academic health center: implications for open access. , 2013, Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA.

[17]  Jonathan Wareham,et al.  Doctors' online information needs, cognitive search strategies, and judgments of information quality and cognitive authority: How predictive judgments introduce bias into cognitive search models , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[18]  Paula Younger.  Beyond Wikipedia: how good a reference source are medical wikis? , 2010 .

[19]  C. Wang,et al.  Association of BRCA1 with the hRad50-hMre11-p95 complex and the DNA damage response. , 1999, Science.

[20]  Raoul Rooman,et al.  Growth and Ovarian Function in Girls with 48,XXXX Karyotype - Patient Report and Review of the Literature , 2002, Journal of pediatric endocrinology & metabolism : JPEM.

[21]  M. Wacha,et al.  The State of OA: A large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles , 2017 .

[22]  Elio Rossi,et al.  Policy , 2007, Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine : eCAM.

[23]  Éric Archambault,et al.  Proportion of Open Access Papers Published in Peer-Reviewed Journals at the European and World Levels—1996-2013 , 2014 .