Exploring the relationship between choice of hosting platform for plain language summary (PLS) content and engagement metrics

Plain language summaries (PLS) are increasingly recognized as an essential component of transparent and accessible scientific communication. By translating complex research findings into clear, non-technical language, PLS enable broader audiences, including patients, caregivers, and non-specialist healthcare professionals, to understand and engage with published research. This aligns with growing expectations from stakeholders, including patients, funders, and publishers, to improve accessibility, inclusivity, and public trust in science. Despite their inherent value, the adoption and effective use of PLS remain inconsistent across the life sciences publishing landscape; evidence suggests that their reach and impact can be limited. One potential barrier is suboptimal audience engagement, which may be influenced by how and where PLS are hosted. Traditional journal websites, although authoritative, may not be optimized for discoverability or user engagement beyond academic audiences. In contrast, independent third-party platforms, which are often designed with enhanced usability, searchability, and multimedia integration, may offer greater potential to amplify visibility and interaction. Understanding how hosting platforms influence viewership metrics is therefore critical to maximizing the impact of PLS. This study investigates the relationship between the platform used for hosting PLS, comparing journal websites with independent third-party websites, and associated engagement metrics. By identifying patterns in visibility and user interaction, this research aims to inform best practices for dissemination strategies and ultimately enhance the accessibility and real-world impact of scientific research.