A Bibliometric Analysis of Health and Medicine Research in Uganda

Authors

  • A Kasule Makerere University Business School
  • B Mutebi Makerere University Business School
  • A Ssentumbwe

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30442/ahr.0803-03-170

Abstract

Background: Research is one of the many domains that help countries to provide solutions to various challenges and improve facilities. The bibliometric analysis measures the research output of individuals/research teams, institutions, and countries and identifies national and international research networks across the globe.

Objective: To examine key research topics, interrelations, and collaboration patterns of published health-related research in Scopus from Ugandan institutions and authors.

Methods: Using the search term "Uganda, health, medicine" in the title, abstract and keywords, documents published between 1963 and 2022 were retrieved from Scopus. The extracted records were analysed in terms of keywords analysis and collaboration networks. The R Bibliometrics package was used to analyse and visualise the data.

Results: The results reveal to scholars and practitioners the most relevant authors, affiliations, publication sources, trends in research topics and collaborating countries. The results provide valuable information for more investigation into the revealed research trends.

Conclusion: Bibliometric analysis of health research in Uganda revealed that the most frequent topics are medicinal plants, traditional medicine and herbal medicine. Research work on malaria, Covid-19 and HIV/AIDS is also evident. There is a significant research collaboration with authors from the United States and the United Kingdom.

References

Moral-Muñoz JA, Herrera-Viedma E, Santisteban EA, Cobo MJ. Software tools for conducting bibliometric analysis in science: An up-to-date review. El profesional de la información 2020; 29: https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.ene.03.

Tranfield D, Denyer D, Smart P. Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Brit J Manag 2003; 14: 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375.

Cai CW. Disruption of financial intermediation by FinTech: A review on crowdfunding and blockchain. Accounting Finance 2018; 58: 965–992. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12405.

Cai CW. Nudging the financial market? A review of the nudge theory. Accounting Finance 2019; 60: 3341-3365. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12471.

Verbeek A, Debackere K, Luwel M, Zimmermann E. Measuring progress and evolution in science and technology: the multiple uses of bibliometric indicators. Int J Manag Rev 2002; 4: 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2370.00083.

Wu YCJ, Wu T. A decade of entrepreneurship education in the Asia Pacific for future directions in theory and practice. Manag Decision 2017; 55: 1333-1350. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-05-2017-0518.

Fahimnia B, Sarkis J, Davarzani H. Green supply chain management: A review and bibliometric analysis. Int J Production Economics 2015; 16: 101-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.01.003.

Appio FP, Martini A, Massa S, Testa S. Unveiling the intellectual origins of social media-based innovation: insights from a bibliometric approach. Scientometrics 2016; 108: 355-388. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1955-9.

Liu Z, Yin Y, Liu W, Dunford M. Visualizing the intellectual structure and evolution of innovation systems research: a bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics 2015; 103: 135-158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1517-y.

Di Stefano G, Peteraf M, Verona G. Dynamic capabilities deconstructed: a bibliographic investigation into the origins, development, and future directions of the research domain. Industrial Corporate Change 2010; 19: 1187-1204. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtq027.

Fangfang Y, Jizhen C, Bin L, Xiaowei T. Bibliometric Analysis of 100 Top-Cited Articles in Gastric Disease. BioMed Res Int 2020; 2020: 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/2672373.

Gusenbauer, M. Google Scholar to overshadow them all? Comparing the sizes of 12 academic search engines and bibliographic databases. Scientometrics 2019; 118: 177-214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2958-5.

Chapman K, Ellinger AE. An evaluation of Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar citations in operations management. Int J Logistics Manag 2019; 30: 1039-1053. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-04-2019-0110.

Massimo A, Corrado C. Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J Informetrics 2017; 11: 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007.

Hjørland, B. Citation analysis: a social and dynamic approach to knowledge organisation. Information Processing Management. 2013; 49: 1313-1325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2013.07.001.

Derviş H. Bibliometric Analysis using Bibliometrix an R Package. J Scientometric Res 2019; 8: 156-160. https://doi.org/10.5530/jscires.8.3.32.

Linnenluecke MK, Marrone M, Singh AK. Conducting systematic literature reviews and bibliometric analyses, Australian J Manag 2020; 45: 175–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896219877678.

Downloads

Published

2022-09-07

Issue

Section

Original Research