Inverted Classroom Teaching of Physiology in Basic Medical Education: Bibliometric Visual Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Over the last decade, there has been growing interest in inverted classroom teaching (ICT) and its various forms within the education sector. Physiology is a core course that bridges basic and clinical medicine, and ICT in physiology has been sporadically practiced to different extents globally. However, students' and teachers' responses and feedback to ICT in physiology are diverse, and the effectiveness of a modified ICT model integrated into regular teaching practice in physiology courses is difficult to assess objectively and quantitatively. Objective: This study aimed to explore the current status and development direction of ICT in physiology in basic medical education using bibliometric visual analysis of the related literature. Methods: A bibliometric analysis of the ICT-related literature in physiology published between 2000 and 2023 was performed using CiteSpace, a bibliometric visualization tool, based on the Web of Science database. Moreover, an in-depth review was performed to summarize the application of ICT in physiology courses worldwide, along with identification of research hot spots and development trends. Results: A total of 42 studies were included for this bibliometric analysis, with the year 2013 marking the commencement of the field. University staff and doctors working at affiliated hospitals represent the core authors of this field, with several research teams forming cooperative relationships and developing research networks. The development of ICT in physiology could be divided into several stages: the introduction stage (2013-2014), extensive practice stage (2015-2019), and modification and growth stage (2020-2023). Gopalan C is the author with the highest citation count of 5 cited publications and has published 14 relevant papers since 2016, with a significant surge from 2019 to 2022. Author collaboration is generally limited in this field, and most academic work has been conducted in independent teams, with minimal cross-team communication. Authors from the United States published the highest number of papers related to ICT in physiology (18 in total, accounting for over 43% of the total papers), and their intermediary centrality was 0.24, indicating strong connections both within the country and internationally. Chinese authors ranked second, publishing 8 papers in the field, although their intermediary centrality was only 0.02, suggesting limited international influence and lower overall research quality. The topics of ICT in physiology research have been multifaceted, covering active learning, autonomous learning, student performance, teaching effect, blended teaching, and others. Conclusions: This bibliometric analysis and literature review provides a comprehensive overview of the history, development process, and future direction of the field of ICT in physiology. These findings can help to strengthen academic exchange and cooperation internationally, while promoting the diversification and effectiveness of ICT in physiology through building academic communities to jointly train emerging medical talents.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.153 | 0.128 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".