Telemedicine Research Trends in 2001-2022 and Research Cooperation Between China and Other Countries Before and After the COVID-19 Pandemic: Bibliometric Analysis (Preprint)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND Advancements in technology have overcome geographical barriers, making telemedicine, which offers remote emergency services, healthcare, and medication guidance, increasingly popular. COVID-19 restrictions amplified its global importance by bridging distances. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to analyze Chinese and global literature data, present new global telemedicine research trends, and clarify the development potential, collaborations, and deficiencies in China's telemedicine research. METHODS We conducted bibliometrics and network analyses on relevant documents from the Web of Science database from 2001 to 2022. Data collection was completed on October 30, 2023. Considering COVID-19’s impact, 2020 was used as a baseline, dividing the data into 2 periods: 2001-2019 and 2020-2022. The development potential was determined based on publication trends. An international coauthorship network analysis identified collaboration statuses and potential. Co-occurrence analysis was conducted for China and the world. RESULTS We identified 25,333 telemedicine-related research papers published between 2001 and 2022, with a substantial increase during the COVID-19 period (2020-2022), particularly in China (1.93-fold increase), moving its global publication rank from tenth to sixth. The United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia contributed 62.96% of the literature, far ahead of China’s 3.90%. Globally, telemedicine research increased significantly post-2020. Between 2001 and 2019, the United States and Australia were central in coauthor networks; post-2020, the United States remained the largest node. Network hubs included the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada. Keyword co-occurrence analysis revealed 5 global clusters from 2001 to 2019 (system technology, health care applications, mobile health, mental health, and electronic health) and 2020 to 2022 (COVID-19, children’s mental health, artificial intelligence, digital health, and rehabilitation of middle-aged and older adults). In China, the research trends aligned with global patterns, with rapid growth post-2020. From 2001 to 2019, China cooperated closely with Indonesia, India, Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea. From 2020 to 2022, cooperation expanded to Japan, Singapore, Malaysia, and South Korea, as well as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, South Africa, Ghana, Lebanon, and other African and Middle Eastern countries. Chinese keyword co-occurrence analysis showed focus areas in system technology, health care applications, mobile health, big data analysis, and electronic health (2001-2019) and COVID-19, artificial intelligence, digital health, and mental health (2020-2022). Although psychology research increased, studies on children’s mental health and middle-aged and older adults’ rehabilitation were limited. CONCLUSIONS We identified the latest trends in telemedicine research, demonstrating its significant potential in China and providing directions for future development and collaborations in telemedicine research.
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 | 0,005 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,057 | 0,139 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 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 ».