Bibliometric analysis of quality of life in patients with inflammatory bowel disease from 2006 to 2016 in China
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-2907.2018.03.014
- VernacularTitle:中国2006—2016年炎症性肠病患者生活质量研究的文献计量学分析
- Author:
Na ZHENG
1
;
Xiuqin ZHU
;
Xifei HE
;
Ru CHEN
;
Yanqiu MA
Author Information
1. 华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院消化内科
- Keywords:
Quality of life;
Bibliometrics;
Inflammatory bowel disease
- From:
Chinese Journal of Modern Nursing
2018;24(3):309-313
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To analyze literature related to quality of life of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients from 2006 to 2016 in China, and to provide information service and reference for further clinical research.Methods Chinese databases such as China BioMedical Literature Database (CBM), China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database (CNKI), Wanfang database and Dayi Medical Database were retrieved for literature from January 2006 to December 2016 about IBD patients' quality of life. Literature area distribution, age distribution, literature types and other aspects were analyzed through literature metrology. Results Through retrieval, 55 articles were screened in the quality of life of patients with IBD related literature. The number of papers showed a linear upward trend from 2006 to 2016, and first authors were mostly from Jiangsu Province, Beijing city and Zhejiang Province, accounting for 43.64％ of the total literature. The number of descriptive literature was the largest in the literature types, 17 of the total (30.91％). The number of coauthors was up to eight, and the rate of coauthors was 1.82％. There were 5 articles cited more than 10 times (10.91％). The research content was mostly relevant to reflect self-efficacy, anxiety, depression and quality of life (16.36％). A total of 18 papers were funded (32.73％). The top 5 journals in the number of documents belong to the statistical source journals.Conclusions In the past 10 years, IBD patients' quality of life has attracted the attention of researchers in our country, but the overall degree of recognition still needs to be improved. At the same time, the overall quality of the literature is not high, and the dominant strength of research has not yet been formed. In the future, we should enrich the research methods and improve the output of high-quality literature.
