Visualizing Patterns and Trends of 25 Years of Published Health Literacy Research

Abstract

Background: With an increase in the number of disciplines contributing to health literacy scholarship, we sought to explore the nature of interdisciplinary research in the field. Objective: This study sought to describe disciplines that contribute to health literacy research and to quantify how disciplines draw from and contribute to an interdisciplinary evidence base, as measured by citation networks. Methods: We conducted a literature search for health literacy articles published between 1991 and 2015 in four bibliographic databases, producing 6,229 unique bibliographic records. We employed a scientometric tool (CiteSpace [Version 4.4.R1]) to quantify patterns in published health literacy research, including a visual path from cited discipline domains to citing discipline domains. Key Results: The number of health literacy publications increased each year between 1991 and 2015. Two spikes, in 2008 and 2013, correspond to the introduction of additional subject categories, including information science and communication. Two journals have been cited more than 2,000 times—the Journal of General Internal Medicine ( n = 2,432) and Patient Education and Counseling ( n = 2,252). The most recently cited journal added to the top 10 list of cited journals is the Journal of Health Communication ( n = 989). Three main citation paths exist in the health literacy data set. Articles from the domain “medicine, medical, clinical” heavily cite from one domain (health, nursing, medicine), whereas articles from the domain “psychology, education, health” cite from two separate domains (health, nursing, medicine and psychology, education, social). Conclusions: Recent spikes in the number of published health literacy articles have been spurred by a greater diversity of disciplines contributing to the evidence base. However, despite the diversity of disciplines, citation paths indicate the presence of a few, self-contained disciplines contributing to most of the literature, suggesting a lack of interdisciplinary research. To address complex and evolving challenges in the health literacy field, interdisciplinary team science, that is, integrating science from across multiple disciplines, should continue to grow. [ Health Literacy Research and Practice . 2017;1(4):e182–e191.] Plain Language Summary: The addition of diverse disciplines conducting health literacy scholarship has spurred recent spikes in the number of publications. However, citation paths suggest that interdisciplinary research can be strengthened. Findings directly align with the increasing emphasis on team science, and support opportunities and resources that incentivize interdisciplinary health literacy res...

The missing link: Towards an integrated health and information literacy research agenda

“…However, the links between information and health literacy have been largely overlooked, despite the connections that are made by Health Education England ( 2021) and the prominence of information literacy scholarship when health literacy is studied through bibliometric methods (Massey et al, 2017;Pinto et al, 2013). The few comparative studies that exist tend to rely on traditional or superseded conceptions of information literacy; Abelsson at al.…”

International handbook of health literacy

“…However, by focusing largely on a functional definition of literacy, public health and medicine risk neglecting the richer and more nuanced viewpoints on this topic currently available in communication, literacy theory and decision analysis. This is supported by a recent review from bibliometric analysis on health literacy literature by Massey et al (2017), which highlighted opportunities to better integrate research across disciplines.…”

Mapping scientific profile and knowledge diffusion of Library Hi Tech

“…The present study employed a variety of scientometric and text mining approaches to map the scientific profile and knowledge dissemination of Library Hi Tech . We represented the intellectual structure of the journal with several commonly used bibliographic entities such as publications, keywords, texts and cited references (Kim and Chen, 2015; Kim et al ., 2016; Massey et al , 2017; Zhu et al , 2017). In particular, we investigated subject category assignment, domain-level citation paths, keyword co-occurrence and networks of co-cited references to capture emerging trends, recent developments and current challenges in the domain.…”