A bibliometric analysis of research on dementia comorbid with depression from 2005 to 2024
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: With the global rise in life expectancy, the incidence of dementia is increasing, often accompanied by depressive symptoms. Understanding the interplay between dementia and depression is crucial, as depression may not only co-occur with but also potentially exacerbate the progression of dementia. This study employs bibliometric analysis to map the global research landscape, identify prevailing themes, and discern future research directions. Methods: We analyzed reviews and original research articles on dementia and depression extracted from the Web of Science Core Collection spanning from 2005 to 2024. Utilizing tools such as CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and an R-based bibliometric analysis package, we assessed trends in publication volume, citation frequency, contributing countries, leading institutions, predominant journals, influential authors, and emergent keywords. Results: A total of 1972 publications were obtained, revealing a consistent increase in both the number of publications and their citation impact over the study period. The United States is the country with the most publications and the most extensive collaborations. The University of Toronto and the Journal of Alzheimer's Disease were identified as key contributors to this field. This research area is currently focused on cognitive impairments, the role of gut microbiota, and non-drug interventions. Future directions emphasize the importance of early detection and intervention, a deeper understanding of the gut-brain axis, and the integration of technology in treatment strategies. Additionally, there is a growing interest in the physiological and psychological interplays such as oxidative stress and its implications. Conclusion: This study underscores pathogenesis, comorbid conditions, and non-drug interventions as primary research focal points, suggesting these areas as potential pathways for therapeutic innovation. These insights are intended to deepen our understanding, enhance diagnostics, and improve the management of dementia and depression, providing guidance for future research aimed at addressing these escalating global health challenges.
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 | 0.009 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.166 | 0.254 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".