Digital health and mobile health: a bibliometric analysis of the 100 most cited papers and their contributing authors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: This study aimed to identify and analyze the top 100 most cited digital health and mobile health (m-health) publications. It could aid researchers in the identification of promising new research avenues, additionally supporting the establishment of international scientific collaboration between interdisciplinary research groups with demonstrated achievements in the area of interest. Methods: On 30th August, 2023, the Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC) electronic database was queried to identify the top 100 most cited digital health papers with a comprehensive search string. From the initial search, 106 papers were identified. After screening for relevance, six papers were excluded, resulting in the final list of the top 100 papers. The basic bibliographic data was directly extracted from WOSCC using its "Analyze" and "Create Citation Report" functions. The complete records of the top 100 papers were downloaded and imported into a bibliometric software called VOSviewer (version 1.6.19) to generate an author keyword map and author collaboration map. Results: The top 100 papers on digital health received a total of 49,653 citations. Over half of them (n = 55) were published during 2013–2017. Among these 100 papers, 59 were original articles, 36 were reviews, 4 were editorial materials, and 1 was a proceeding paper. All papers were written in English. The University of London and the University of California system were the most represented affiliations. The USA and the UK were the most represented countries. The Journal of Medical Internet Research was the most represented journal. Several diseases and health conditions were identified as a focus of these works, including anxiety, depression, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Conclusions: The findings underscore key areas of focus in the field and prominent contributors, providing a roadmap for future research in digital and m-health.
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 | 0.016 | 0.069 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.185 | 0.189 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".