ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Knowledge domain and emerging trends in medication literacy research from 2003 to 2024: a scientometric and bibliometric analysis using CiteSpace and VOSviewer.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The current status and influencing factors of medication literacy among patients with cardiovascular diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Virtual reality training for gait disorders in Parkinson's disease: a bibliometric and visual analysis of hotspots and trends using CiteSpace and VOSviewer.Frontiers in neurologyPooled it
- Emerging Topics and Trends in Neutrophil Extracellular Traps in ARDS: A Bibliometric and Visual Analysis.Mediators of inflammation · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Medication literacy (ML) has emerged as a critical global public health concern, garnering growing scholarly attention over the past two decades. To delineate major research domains, identify evolving trends, and inform future research priorities, we conducted a scientometric analysis of the scientific literature on ML. Methods: A systematic search was performed to retrieve publications on ML from the Web of Science Core Collection, covering the period from 2003 to 2024. Scientometric analyses were executed using CiteSpace and VOSviewer to visualize and evaluate collaborative networks, including co-citation references, co-occurring keywords, and contributions by countries, institutions, authors, and journals. Results: The analysis incorporated 1,968 eligible publications. A rapidly growing trend in research interest in ML was observed, with an average annual growth rate of 46.1% in publications between 2003 and 2022. Three major research trends were identified: relationship between ML and medication adherence, the development of ML-specific assessment tools, and investigation of psychosocial factors associated with ML. The United States of America, Northwestern University, Davis Tc, and Patient Education and Counseling were identified as the most cited and influential entities within this field, representing the leading country, institution, author, and journal, respectively. Conclusion: Scientometric analysis provides invaluable insights to clinicians and researchers involved in ML research by identifying leading contributors, intellectual bases and research trends. ML is evolving from unidimensional analysis to multidisciplinary exploration of dynamic mechanisms. Future research on ML is facing significant challenges, including the exploration of adherence mechanisms, validation of digital assessment tools, and the moderating effect model of socio-psychological factors on ML.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.