MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415683208 · doi:10.35631/ijmoe.726014

GLOBAL RESEARCH TRENDS IN SPECIAL EDUCATION: A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS

2025· article· en· W4415683208 on OpenAlexaff
Sofea Hanim Affendi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Modern Education · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScopusInclusion (mineral)Higher educationTrend analysisThematic analysisSpecial educationRelevance (law)Bibliometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This bibliometric analysis investigates global research trends in the field of special education over an 11-year period from 2015 to 2025. Special education has increasingly gained prominence due to its role in promoting inclusivity and addressing diverse learning needs, particularly through the integration of digital tools and evidence-based practices. Despite policy advances and technological innovations, disparities in implementation and access persist globally. To examine the evolution of scholarly focus in this area, 939 articles were systematically retrieved from the Scopus database using precise inclusion criteria, including language, publication type, and thematic relevance to students with special needs. The data were cleaned using OpenRefine and further analysed through VOSviewer to identify patterns in keyword co-occurrence, author co-citation, and country-level collaboration. The results revealed a consistent upward trend in publication output, peaking in 2024, with the United States leading in contributions, followed by Turkey, the United Kingdom, and Saudi Arabia. The most frequently cited works address critical themes such as disproportionality in special education placement, teacher attrition, and inclusive pedagogy. Prominent research clusters emerged around inclusive education policies, professional development, social equity, and mental health of educators. Keyword mapping indicated a shift from foundational topics to emerging concerns like e-inclusion, multilingual learners, and burnout among special education teachers. Co-citation and co-authorship analyses highlighted influential authors and collaborative networks shaping the discourse. While the findings underscore growing global interest in special education, they also point to underrepresentation from certain regions, signalling opportunities for broader engagement. This study not only provides a comprehensive overview of the intellectual landscape in special education but also informs future research directions, policy formulation, and professional development strategies to enhance educational equity worldwide.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.667
Threshold uncertainty score0.929

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0810.101
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.201
GPT teacher head0.557
Teacher spread0.356 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Modern EducationSame topicTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesFrench-language works237,207