MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Two decades of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) in health research: a bibliometric analysis

2024· article· en· W6902304383 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternational Classification of Functioning, Disability and HealthBiopsychosocial modelRehabilitationThematic analysisBibliometricsHealth careQuality of life (healthcare)Quarter (Canadian coin)Comparability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: We conducted a twenty-year bibliometric analysis of scientific literature, focusing on the trends of The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) use in health research. Methods: We retrieved 3’467 documents published between 2002 and 2022, sourced from the Web of Science Core Collection database. We used the Bibliometrix and VoSviewer tools for descriptive analyses and data visualization. Results: Our findings indicate a significant increase in ICF application since 2011, with an average annual growth rate of 13.19%. Prominent contributions were observed globally, with notable outputs from the U.S., Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, and Switzerland. The Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Swiss Paraplegic Research, and McMaster University authored a quarter of the documents (24.6%). Collaboration networks of countries and institutions revealed robust partnerships, particularly between Germany and Switzerland. "Rehabilitation" was the most frequently occurring keyword, although a thematic shift towards epidemiology, aging, and health-related quality of life was observed post-2020. While rehabilitation remained the primary thematic focus, literature post-2020 highlighted epidemiology as a growing area of interest. Conclusions: A steady increase in ICF-based research mirrors the rising interest in a biopsychosocial and person-centered approach to healthcare. However, the literature is primarily produced by high-resource countries, with underrepresentation from low and middle-resource countries, suggesting an area of future research to address this discrepancy. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) serves as a universal framework for describing functioning and disability.The increasing application of the ICF in rehabilitation research underscores its value in developing comprehensive, person-centered care plans.By integrating the ICF, rehabilitation programs can better address the multifaceted needs of patients, facilitating improved outcomes in participation and quality of life.The observed thematic shift towards aging and health-related quality of life post-2020 indicates the growing relevance of the ICF in managing the complex health challenges of an aging population.The study also suggests that expanding the ICF implementation in low- and middle-income countries could bridge existing disparities in rehabilitation services, promoting global health equity. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) serves as a universal framework for describing functioning and disability. The increasing application of the ICF in rehabilitation research underscores its value in developing comprehensive, person-centered care plans. By integrating the ICF, rehabilitation programs can better address the multifaceted needs of patients, facilitating improved outcomes in participation and quality of life. The observed thematic shift towards aging and health-related quality of life post-2020 indicates the growing relevance of the ICF in managing the complex health challenges of an aging population. The study also suggests that expanding the ICF implementation in low- and middle-income countries could bridge existing disparities in rehabilitation services, promoting global health equity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.037
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.126
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0370.126
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.1870.251
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.319
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.148 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders→French-language works237,207→