Research Progress and Hot Topics in Telerehabilitation for Hip or Knee Arthroplasty
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: Many publications on telerehabilitation for hip or knee arthroplasty have been published in recent years. However, no specific studies have attempted to characterize research hotspots, global research collaborations, or trends related to telerehabilitation after hip or knee arthroplasty. Therefore, the aim of this bibliometric analysis was to provide an overview of the current status of research and map the research landscape on telerehabilitation for joint replacement to understand current trends, identify research gaps, and guide future research directions. METHODS: The Web of Science Core Collection and PubMed were comprehensively searched to identify all relevant English-language documents published from 2003 to June 7, 2024. Data from these published studies were then cleaned and structured. CiteSpace and VOSviewer were used to conduct the bibliometric visualization and comparative analysis of countries, institutions, journals, authors, references, and keywords. Then, the map illustrating the research hotspots and knowledge structure was plotted based on the analysis results. RESULTS: A total of 229 records were obtained, and the number of articles published has increased steadily over the investigated period. The largest increase was observed in 2022. With the highest number of publications and centrality, the United States was the most influential country. The University of Sherbrooke was the most productive institution. Author Boissy P. ranked first in terms of the number of publications, while Tousignant M. ranked highest in cited authors, with 7 publications and 65 citations. The Journal of Arthroplasty published the greatest number of articles, with 29 publications. The most popular keywords from 2018 to 2023 were "home telerehabilitation," "older adults," and "physical therapy". In terms of the strongest citation burst, the top five keywords were associated with "total knee arthroplasty," "in home tele rehabilitation," "physical activity," "motion," and "range." The frontier keywords were "patient satisfaction," "mobile application," "self-efficacy," "fear avoidance model," "home assessment tool," and "cost benefit analysis." CONCLUSIONS: The current status and trends in telerehabilitation for hip or knee arthroplasty are presented. A major concern at present is physical therapy for home telerehabilitation in the elderly. In the future, mobile app-based telerehabilitation programs for arthroplasty will continue to be encouraged, and some outcomes, such as "patient satisfaction," "self-efficacy," and "cost benefit analysis," are expected to receive more attention. Our work will serve as a valuable resource, providing fundamental references and a directional guide for future 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 | 0,009 | 0,034 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,057 | 0,102 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 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 ».