摘要
目的对比分析2017-2021年不同国家和地区在中医药研究主题、研究热点方面的异同。方法检索Web of Science核心合集中中医药研究文献,检索时限为2017年1月1日至2021年7月14日。提取纳入文献发表国家、机构、关键词和引文等数据,分别对国家、研究机构进行合作网络分析,对共被引文献进行核心引文分析,对关键词进行词频及聚类分析,并通过计算中介中心性(C)判断节点重要性。结果共纳入中医药研究文献11839篇,主要分布于中国(10599篇,C=0.88)、美国(731篇,C=0.17)、韩国(272篇,C=0.11)。发文频次排名前三位的机构依次为北京中医药大学(670篇)、上海中医药大学(521篇)、中国科学院(492篇),中国独立完成研究排名前三位的机构依次为北京中医药大学(590篇)、上海中医药大学(459篇)、南京中医药大学(411篇),外国独立完成研究排名前三位的机构依次为韩国韩医学研究院(50篇)、韩国庆熙大学(38篇)、韩国釜山大学(29篇)。中医药研究共被引文献核心引文分析得到6个聚类条目,中国机构独立完成研究得到9个聚类条目,外国机构独立完成研究得到8个聚类条目。中医药研究的词频和聚类分析共得到5个聚类条目,包括细胞凋亡、代谢组学、炎症、中医药、新型冠状病毒肺炎;除检索相关词外,排名前三位的关键词依次为表达(1249篇,C=0.13)、细胞凋亡(1187篇,C=0.12)、炎症(816篇,C=0.12)。中国机构独立完成研究的词频和聚类分析共得到5个聚类条目,包括炎症、中医药、细胞凋亡、网络药理学、多聚糖;除检索相关词外,排名前三位的关键词依次为表达(1065篇,C=0.14)、细胞凋亡(1000篇,C=0.22)、炎症(690篇,C=0.09)。外国机构独立完成研究的词频和聚类分析共得到7个聚类条目,包括细胞凋亡、针刺、新型冠状病毒肺炎、抗氧化剂、基因毒性、阿尔茨海默病、中草药;除检索相关词外,排名前三位的关键词依次为细胞凋亡(59篇,C=0.05)、表达(59篇,C=0.03)、提取物(51篇,C=0.04)。使用关键词种类方面,外国机构独立完成研究(207种,1837次)多于中国机构独立完成研究(82种,19330次);与外国机构独立完成的研究对比,中国机构独立完成的研究中细胞凋亡、炎症、机制、细胞、鉴定、氧化应激、通路、大鼠、增殖、小鼠、模型、网络药理学的出现频率较高(P<0.05或P<0.01),而中医药、针刺和草药的出现频率则较低(P<0.01)。结论在中医药研究主题方面,中国机构更倾向于对网络药理学等新方法的使用、中药鉴定和功效筛选、对新发疾病的快速介入治疗,而外国机构则更重视中药提取物和中药递送技术;在研究热点方面,中外机构均将机制研究的重点放在细胞凋亡、炎症和氧化应激上,但前者同时更突出对新研究方法的引进和创新,后者则更重视针刺研究。
Objective To analyze the similarities and differences in research topics,possible research hotspots and frontier trends of traditional Chinese medicine(TCM)researches published from 2017 to 2021 in different countries and regions.Methods The Web of Science Core Collection was searched for TCM-related research literature from January 1 st,2017 to July 14 th,2021.The data including publication countries,institutions,keywords and citations were extracted,and the cooperation network analysis for countries and institutions was performed separately.Citation analysis was conducted for co-cited papers,while frequency and cluster analysis was performed for the keywords.The betweenness centrality(C)was calculated to judge the importance of the nodes.Results A total of 11,839 papers were included,mainly distributed in China(10,599 papers,C=0.88),the United States(731 papers,C=0.17)and South Korea(272 papers,C=0.11).The top three institutions with most papers were Beijing University of Chinese Medicine(670 papers),Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine(521 papers)and Chinese Academy of Sciences(492 papers).The top three Chinese institutions who independently completed the research and published most papers were Beijing University of Chinese Medicine(590 papers),Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine(459),and Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine(411 papers),while the top three foreign institutions were Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine(50 papers),Kyung Hee University(38 papers)and Pusan National University(29 papers).Citation analysis conducted for co-cited papers in TCM-related researches obtained six clusters;when performed separately for researches completed independently by Chinese institutions and foreign institutions,the corresponding clusters obtained were nine and eight.In terms of word frequency and cluster analysis,five clusters were obtained which were apoptosis,metabolomics,inflammation,TCM and coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19);except for searching related words,the most frequent words were expression(1,249 papers,C=0.13),apoptosis(1,187 papers,C=0.12),and inflammation(816 papers,C=0.12).Five clusters regarding words frequency were obtained for researches independently completed by Chinese institutions,which were inflammation,TCM,apoptosis,network pharmacology and polysaccharide;except for searching related words,the top three frequent words were expression(1,065 papers,C=0.14),apoptosis(1,000 papers,C=0.22),and inflammation(690 papers,C=0.09).Seven clusters regarding words frequency were obtained for researches independently completed by foreign institutions,which were apoptosis,acupuncture,COVID-19,antioxidants,genotoxicity,Alzheimer’s disease,and Chinese herbal medicine;except for searching related words,the most frequent words were apoptosis(59 papers,C=0.05),expression(59 papers,C=0.03)and extracts(51 papers,C=0.04).TCM researches completed independently by foreign institutions(207 types,1,837 times)used more types of keywords than those by Chinese institutions(82 types,19,330 times).Compared to TCM researches done independently by foreign institutions,those done independently by Chinese institutions were more frequent in apoptosis,inflammation.mechanism,cells,identification,oxidative stress,pathways,rats,proliferation,mice,model and network pharmacology(P<0.01 or P<0.05),and less frequent in TCM,acupuncture and Chinese herbal medicine(P<0.01).Conclusion In terms of research topics,TCM researches done independently by Chinese institutions are more inclined to use new methods such as network pharmacology,identification and efficacy screening of Chinese herbal medicine,and rapid interventional treatment of emerging diseases,while those done independently by foreign institutions place more emphasis on herbal extracts and drug delivery methods.In terms of research hotspots and frontier trends,both of them perform mechanism researches mainly on apoptosis,inflammation and oxidative stress,but Chinese institutions focus more on the introduction and innovative use of new research methods,while foreign institutions focus more on acupuncture researches.
作者
高振
徐一喆
董竞成
GAO Zhen;XU Yizhe;DONG Jingcheng(Huashan Hospital of Fudan University,Shanghai,200040)
出处
《中医杂志》
CSCD
北大核心
2022年第13期1283-1290,共8页
Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine
基金
中医药传承与创新“百千万”人才工程(岐黄工程)岐黄学者资助项目。
关键词
中医药研究
研究热点
研究主题
词频
突现关键词
文献计量学
traditional Chinese medicine research
research hotspot
research topic
word frequency
emergent keywords
bibliometrics
作者简介
通讯作者:董竞成,jcdong2004@126.com,(021)5288830。
