Bibliometric analysis of medical and health research collaboration between China and ASEAN countries
Xia Liang,Ruhao Zhang,Shuyun Wang,Ranfeng Hang,Siyuan Wang,Yajie Zhao,Yutong Sun,Zhaoquan Huang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076231184993
2023-01-01
Digital Health
Abstract:Objective To reveal the characteristics, development trend and potential opportunities of China–ASEAN collaboration in the medical and health field based on bibliometrics. Methods Scopus and International Center for the Study of Research Lab (ICSR Lab) was used to analyze the scale, collaboration network and distribution, impact of cooperative papers, collaboration dominance and evolution of the literature on China–ASEAN medical and health collaboration in the Scopus database from 1992 to 2022. Results From 1992 to 2022, 19,764 articles on medical and health collaboration between China and ASEAN were filtered for analysis. The number of China–ASEAN collaborations has shown a clear upward trend over the years, indicating a gradually closer and improved collaboration relationship overall. The institutional collaboration network between China and ASEAN countries was obviously clustered, and the network connectivity was limited. The substantial differences between the median and mean values of citation impact of China–ASEAN medical and health research collaboration reflected that the collaboration was ‘less’ but ‘better’. The dominance share of collaboration between China and the main ASEAN countries was fluctuating upward and has become more and more stable after 2004. Most of the China–ASEAN collaboration focused on their own characteristic research topics. In recent years, collaboration in infectious diseases and public health had expanded significantly, while other research topics had maintained in a complementary development trend. Conclusion Collaboration between China and ASEAN in the medical and health field has exhibited a progressively closer relationship, and the trend of complementary research has remained stable. However, there are still areas of concern, including the limited scale of collaboration, narrow scope of participation and weak dominance.
public, environmental & occupational health,health care sciences & services,medical informatics,health policy & services