Trends in Scientific Output on the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Community Research: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Literature
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) represent a diverse group with special needs due to the unusual developmental experiences and social inequalities. This paper aims to explore and outline a future research direction in LGBT issues through tracing our historical understanding of this population from an aspect of scientific research. Methods: LGBT-related peer-reviewed documents were retrieved from the PubMed database and the study period was set from the inception to 2021. Python-based methods were then performed to analyze the publication metadata and extract the most prominent research topics based on the abstract contents. Key points covered in the study were the development and trend of scientific effort and research themes in the LGBT topic, identified through the Bigram model and Latent Dirichlet Allocation algorithm. Results: A total of 21,221 publication records were retrieved from the PubMed database. Literature analyses demonstrated that scientific research in LGBT had grown gradually but began to gain momentum since 2010, evidencing increased attention to this demographic in the last decade. Regarding the region-wise scientific effort in LGBT, the United States (U.S.) was the most productive country (with > 45% of the total publications), followed by the United Kingdom (UK), Canada, Australia, and the Netherlands. Furthermore, Peru and Thailand, besides the U.S., Australia, and Canada, were the top countries that had relatively allocated more of their scientific efforts to LGBT research based on the calculated activity indices. Topics attracting the most attention in LGBT research over time were “male sexuality and risk", followed by "sexual development", "health care service", "social experience", and "intervention strategies". Discussion: This study provided a broad view of the developmental trends in LGBT research from invisibility to attention through a bibliometric lens and could serve as a data-based guideline for policymakers and social scientists. Take-home message: As shown by this bibliometric analysis, scientific research in Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LBGT) had grown gradually but began to gain momentum since 2010, evidencing increased attention to this demographic in the last decade.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,041 | 0,152 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».