基于科学之网的人口老龄化领域网络分析-80页_8mb

Summary of Network Analysis in the Field of Population Aging Based on Web of Science

Core Content

This report presents a network analysis of academic literature related to the Regional Action Plan on Healthy Ageing (RAP) in the Western Pacific Region (WPR), focusing on five key objectives. The analysis was conducted using the Web of Science (WoS) database and CiteSpace 5.8.R3 as the visualization and analysis tool. The goal was to identify influential researchers, institutions, disciplines, keywords, and literature in the field of population aging in the WPR, in order to provide a comprehensive overview of the academic landscape.

Methodology

• Database Selection: Web of Science (WoS) was chosen due to its extensive coverage of scientific, social science, and humanities literature.
• Search Strategy: A search string combining terms related to aging, RAP objectives, and WPR countries was used. Each objective had a specific set of keywords and country names.
• Time Slicing:
  • Objective 1: 1991–2021
  • Objective 2: 1990–2021
  • Objective 3: 1992–2021
  • Objective 4: 1991–2021
  • Objective 5: 1991–2021
• Inclusion Criteria: Only peer-reviewed English publications from 1990 onwards with full-text access were included. Excluded were duplicates, reviews, and irrelevant content.
• Network Types: Five types of networks were analyzed: co-author, co-institution, co-category, co-keyword, and co-citation.

Key Findings

1. Publications by Year and Country

• Objective 1: 1,320 publications from 1991 to 2021.
• Objective 2: 3,277 publications from 1990 to 2021.
• Objective 3: 2,270 publications from 1992 to 2021.
• Objective 4: 1,354 publications from 1991 to 2021.
• Objective 5: 628 publications from 1991 to 2021.
• Top 10 Countries: The majority of publications were from Japan, China, Australia, the United States, and the United Kingdom.

2. Co-author Network

• Total Authors: 3,910 authors with 10,836 co-authorships.
• Network Density: 0.0014, indicating a sparse and disconnected network.
• Modularity and Silhouette Values: 0.987 and 0.981, respectively, indicating strong and reliable clustering.
• Main Clusters: Five major clusters identified, with the largest containing 254 authors and centered around topics such as "functional status" and "social participation."
• Top Authors: Katsunori Kondo, Ichiro Kawachi, Jun Aida, and others were identified as key contributors with high frequency and centrality.

3. Co-institution Network

• Total Institutions: 884 institutions with 2,398 collaborations.
• Network Density: 0.0061, indicating a relatively dense and interconnected network.
• Modularity and Silhouette Values: 0.7307 and 0.9141, respectively, indicating statistically significant clustering.
• Main Clusters: Five substantial clusters identified, with the largest comprising 638 institutions and focusing on topics like "social participation" and "employment status."
• Top Institutions: The University of Tokyo, The University of Sydney, Monash University, and others were highlighted as key players in the network.

4. Co-category Network

• Total Categories: 98 WoS categories with 573 cross-disciplinary publications.
• Network Density: 0.1206, showing relatively intensive cross-disciplinary research.
• Main Cluster: Composed of 95 categories, representing 96% of the network.

5. Co-keyword Network

• Total Keywords: 265 keywords with 1,351 co-occurrence relationships.
• Network Density: 0.0386, indicating a moderate level of keyword connectivity.
• Main Cluster: 252 keywords, representing 95% of the network, focusing on topics like "self-perceived usefulness" and "community-based care."

6. Co-citation Network

• Total Publications: 8,246 publications with 25,580 co-citations.
• Network Density: 0.0008, showing a sparse and scattered citation network.
• Modularity and Silhouette Values: 0.988 and 0.9734, respectively, indicating strong and reliable clustering.
• Main Clusters: Five clusters identified, with the largest containing 1,115 publications and centered around "self-perceived usefulness" and "evidence-based care."

Conclusion

The network analysis reveals a growing body of research on population aging in the WPR, with significant contributions from Japan, China, and Australia. The research is interdisciplinary, involving a wide range of institutions and authors. The co-citation and co-keyword networks suggest that certain topics and literature are more influential and frequently cited, indicating potential areas for further exploration and policy development. The study provides a valuable resource for understanding the academic landscape of healthy aging in the WPR and highlights the need for continued research and collaboration in this field.