Dataset Information

Thematic research clusters in very old populations (≥ 80 years): a bibliometric approach.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Population aging will be one of humanity's major challenges in the decades to come. In addition to focusing on the pathologies causing the greatest mortality and morbidity in this population, such as dementia, health research in elderly people must consider a myriad of other interlinked factors, such as geriatric syndromes, social aspects, and factors related to preserving quality of life and promoting healthy aging. This study aims to identify the main subject areas attracting research attention with regard to very old (≥ 80 years) populations.

Methods

Documents assigned with the medical subject heading "Aged, 80 and over" were retrieved from MEDLINE and the Web of Science. This dataset was used to determine publication output by disease, geographic region, country, and discipline. A co-word analysis was undertaken to identify thematic research clusters.

Results

Since the mid-2000s, there has been a boom in scientific output focusing specifically on very old populations, especially in Europe (43.7% of the documents) but also in North America (30.5%) and Asia (26%); other regions made only nominal contributions (0.5 to 4.4%). The USA produced the most research, while the most growth over the study period occurred in Japan, Spain, and China. Four broad thematic clusters were identified: a) geriatric diseases, health services for the aged, and social and psychological issues of aging; b) cardiovascular diseases; c) neoplasms, and d) bacterial infections & anti-bacterial agents.

Conclusions

Scientific research in very old populations covers a wide variety of interrelated topics. In quantitative terms, the top subject areas have to do with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases (including aortic valve stenosis and stroke), dementia, and neoplasms. However, other degenerative pathologies, geriatric syndromes, and different social and psychosocial aspects also attract considerable interest. It is necessary to promote more equal participation in global research on pathologies and topics related to very elderly populations, as the highest rates of population aging and the largest numbers of elderly people in the next decades will be in low- and middle-income countries.

SUBMITTER: Gonzalez-Alcaide G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8058755 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe field of medical education remains poorly delineated such that there is no broad consensus of articles or journals that comprise 'the field'. This lack of consensus indicates a missed opportunity for researchers to generate insights about the field that could facilitate conducting bibliometric studies and other research designs (e.g., systematic reviews) and also enable individuals to identify themselves as 'medical education researchers'. Other fields have utilised bibliometric field delineation, which is the assigning of articles or journals to a certain field in an effort to define that field.ProcessIn this Research Approach, three bibliometric field delineation approaches-information retrieval, core journals, and journal co-citation-are introduced. For each approach, the authors describe attempts to apply it in medical education and identify related strengths and weaknesses. Based on co-citation, the authors propose the Medical Education Journal List 24 (MEJ-24), as a starting point for delineating medical education and invite the community to collaborate on improving and potentially expanding this list.PearlsAs a research approach, field delineation is complicated, and there is no clear best way to delineate the field of medical education. However, recent advances in information science provide potentially fruitful approaches to deal with the field's complexity. When considering these approaches, researchers should consider collaborating with bibliometricians. Bibliometric approaches rely on available metadata for articles and journals, which necessitates that researchers examine the metadata prior to analysis to understand its strengths and weaknesses, and to assess how this might affect data interpretation. While using bibliometric approaches for field delineation is valuable, it is important to remember that these techniques are only as good as the research team's interpretation of the data, which suggests that an expanded approach is needed to better delineate medical education, an approach that includes active discussion within the medical education community.