Research Hotspots and Trend Analysis of User Experience Design for Healthcare Service System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International Organization for Standardization(ISO) defines user experience as the perceptions and responses of users about the usage or anticipated use of a system, product, or service. The notion of "patient-centred" service has steadily evolved over the last several years, focusing on user experience in the healthcare service system. Current research on user experience in healthcare service systems integrates topics such as psychology, design, and engineering. It is impossible to conduct an impartial analysis of this multidisciplinary topic based on a survey of the traditional literature due to the complexity and volume of the reference material. This study utilises bibliometrics to visualise the retrieved data's knowledge structure and structure of the retrieved data and to offer a foundation for future research in the area of user experience design for healthcare service systems.The information for this research comes from the Web of Science. The search strategy was TS=((User Experience)AND(Medical Services OR Medical Products OR Medical Diagnostic Equipment)), and the search sources were the five primary citation indexes typically utilised in the WOS database: SSCI, SCI-Expanded, A&HCI, CPCI-S and CPCI-SSH. During the search process, the sources had to be modified or eliminated to prevent the loss of interdisciplinary literature. The search results were produced as "complete records and cited references" text files. Manual screening is used to screen out publications that diverge from the subject of the study, lack on-site information (e.g., time, keywords, authors, and other crucial information), include duplicate data, or are otherwise distracting. For additional quantitative analysis, a total of 2030 articles were retrieved.This work employs a mix of bibliometrics, content analysis, and information visualisation, as proposed by Pritchard in 1969: bibliometrics may assist in identifying patterns and information in vast volumes of literature via quantitative analysis of all sorts of literature. The study also used a combination of two bibliometric tools, CiteSpace and VOSviewer, to examine keyword co-occurrence analysis and literature co-citation in the cited literature and to map the associated scientific information to visualise research paths and frontier regions.The results of the study indicate that: 1. From a macro perspective, the number of documents in the search area is increasing and will remain a key research direction in the academic community; 2. From the perspective of the number of articles published, the UK, the US, China, and Canada are leading the research in this field; kings coll London, Mcmaster univ, Boston univ and other institutions are more active, but there are few high-producing institutions, and eastern Europe is the least productive region. The need for more collaboration between research institutions and between institutions and writers and the shortage of prolific authors represent the most significant research limitations. 3.The disciplines of "healthcare," "experience," "mental health," "services," "telemedicine," "patient satisfaction," "impact," and "schizophrenia" are varied and strongly interrelated. Nonetheless, this topic's fundamental study has generated many great works.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".