Analysis of the research fronts of medical professionalism based on Web of Science

doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn115259-20230607-00057

Abstract

Abstract: Objective Focusing on the external characteristics and research fronts of medical professionalism literature, this study aims at providing references for the reform of medical professionalism teaching and evaluation. Methods Based on the Science Citation Database, the HistCite and CiteSpace software were used to conduct research external characteristics description and co-citation cluster analysis of medical professionalism literature published between 2013 and 2022. Results A total of 3 825 articles were included, with an average annual growth rate of 5.5%. They were published in 1 008 journals, and the authors were from 4 056 research institutions in 105 countries or regions. The research fronts focused on seven topics, including professional identity formation, professionalism teaching, professionalism evaluation and unprofessional behaviors, psychological traits, the impact of social media on medical professionalism, cultivation of health professionals' management competency, and application of theoretical domains framework in medical education. Conclusions The annual number of literature related to medical professionalism has shown an steady upward trend. The research fronts topics focus on the main body research (connotation, teaching and evaluation) and related research (influencing factors, relevant competencies and research based on theoretical domains framework) of medical professionalism.

Key words: Physicians, Professionalism, Bibliometrics, Cluster analysis

CLC Number:

R-05

Wen Deliang, Li Honghe, Song Xinzhi, Xin Chunyu. Analysis of the research fronts of medical professionalism based on Web of Science[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Education, 2024, 44(4): 266-271.

References

[1] Frenk J, Chen L, Bhutta ZA, et al. Health professionals for a new century: transforming education to strengthen health systems in an interdependent world[J]. Lancet, 2010, 376(9756):1923-1958. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61854-5.
[2] Song X, Jiang N, Li H, et al. Medical professionalism research characteristics and hotspots: a 10-year bibliometric analysis of publications from 2010 to 2019[J]. Scientometrics, 2021, 126(9):8009-8027. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-021-03993-0.
[3] 中国科学院科技战略咨询研究院, 中国科学院文献情报中心, 科睿唯安. 中国科学院报告研判128个科学研究前沿[EB/OL](2023-11-28)[2024-01-01]. https://www.cas.cn/cm/202311/t20231129_4988827.shtml.
[4] 闻德亮,李鸿鹤,宋鑫智. 基于科学引文数据库的医学教育研究前沿分析(2023)[J].中华医学教育杂志, 2023, 43(12):881-886. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn115259-20230331-00349.
[5] Cruess RL, Cruess SR, Steinert Y. Amending miller's pyramid to include professional identity formation[J]. Acad Med, 2016, 91(2):180-185. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000913.
[6] Jha V, Mclean M, Gibbs TJ, et al. Medical professionalism across cultures: a challenge for medicine and medical education[J]. Med Teach, 2015, 37(1):74-80. DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2014.920492.
[7] Irby DM, Hamstra SJ. Parting the clouds: three professionalism frameworks in medical education[J]. Acad Med, 2016, 91(12):1606-1611. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001190.
[8] Mak-van der Vossen MC, de la Croix A, Teherani A, et al. A road map for attending to medical students' professionalism lapses[J]. Acad Med, 2019, 94(4):570-578. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002537.
[9] Al-Ghunaim TA, Johnson J, Biyani CS, et al. Surgeon burnout, impact on patient safety and professionalism: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Am J Surg, 2022, 224(1 Pt A):228-238. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2021.12.027.
[10] Guckian J, Utukuri M, Asif A, et al. Social media in undergraduate medical education: A systematic review[J]. Med Educ, 2021, 55(11):1227-1241. DOI: 10.1111/medu.14567.
[11] Correia T, Denis JL. Hybrid management, organizational configuration, and medical professionalism: evidence from the establishment of a clinical directorate in portugal[J]. BMC Health Serv Res, 2016, 16 Suppl 2:161. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-016-1398-2.
[12] Lee JS, Parashar V, Miller JB, et al. Opioid prescribing after curative-intent surgery: a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2018, 25(7):1843-1851. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-018-6466-x.
[13] Young L, Shrubsole K, Worrall L, et al. Factors that influence Australian speech-language pathologists' self-reported uptake of aphasia rehabilitation recommendations from clinical practice guidelines[J]. Aphasiology, 2018, 32(6):646-665. DOI: 10.1080/02687038.2018.1443201.
[14] Li H, Ding N, Zhang Y, et al. Assessing medical professionalism: a systematic review of instruments and their measurement properties[J]. PLoS One, 2017, 12(5):e0177321. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177321.
[15] 李鸿鹤, 李颖, 闻德亮. 新时代医师职业精神的内涵与发展[J]. 中华医学教育探索杂志, 2021, 20(12):1365-1370. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn116021-20211108-00688.
[16] Guckian J, Utukuri M, Asif A, et al. Social media in undergraduate medical education: a systematic review[J]. Med Educ, 2021, 55(11):1227-1241. DOI: 10.1111/medu.14567.