Mapping Research Trends of Universal Health Coverage From 1990 to 2019: Bibliometric Analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Universal health coverage (UHC) is one of many ambitious, health-related, sustainable development goals. Sharing various experiences of achieving UHC, in terms of challenges, pitfalls, and future prospects, can help policy and decision-makers reduce the likelihood of committing errors. As such, scholarly articles and technical reports are of paramount importance in shedding light on the determinants that make it possible to achieve UHC. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to conduct a comprehensive analysis of UHC-related scientific literature from 1990 to 2019. METHODS: We carried out a bibliometric analysis of papers related to UHC published from January 1990 to September 2019 and indexed in Scopus via VOSviewer (version 1.6.13; CWTS). Relevant information was extracted: the number of papers published, the 20 authors with the highest number of publications in the field of UHC, the 20 journals with the highest number of publications related to UHC, the 20 most active funding sources for UHC-related research, the 20 institutes and research centers that have produced the highest number of UHC-related research papers, the 20 countries that contributed the most to the research field of UHC, the 20 most cited papers, and the latest available impact factors of journals in 2018 that included the UHC-related items under investigation. RESULTS: In our analysis, 7224 articles were included. The publication trend was increasing, showing high interest in the scientific community. Most researchers were from the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada, with Thailand being a notable exception. The Lancet accounted for 3.95% of published UHC-related research. Among the top 20 funding sources, the World Health Organization (WHO), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) accounted for 1.41%, 1.34%, and 1.02% of published UHC-related research, respectively. The highest number of citations was found for articles published in The Lancet, the American Journal of Psychiatry, and the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). The top keywords were "health insurance," "insurance," "healthcare policy," "healthcare delivery," "economics," "priority," "healthcare cost," "organization and management," "health services accessibility," "reform," "public health," and "health policy." CONCLUSIONS: The findings of our study showed an increasing scholarly interest in UHC and related issues. However, most research concentrated in middle- and high-income regions and countries. Therefore, research in low-income countries should be promoted and supported, as this could enable a better understanding of the determinants of the barriers and obstacles to UHC achievement and improve global health.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,012 | 0,073 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,226 | 0,287 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».