ReviewGlobal health research and policy2026
A bibliometric analysis of global health curriculum teaching models: Current status, hotspots, and trends in higher education between 2014 and 2024.
Review in Global health research and policy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: As global health challenges become increasingly complex, understanding the dynamic evolution of teaching models in higher education is critical. This study aims to employ bibliometric methods to map the status, identify hotpots, and capture key trends in global health curriculum design over the past decade. Methods: Utilizing CiteSpace 6.4.R1, a comprehensive bibliometric analysis was conducted on 209 studies focusing on global health curriculum teaching models, indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection between 2014 and 2024. Articles and reviews published in English were retrieved using a structured search strategy combining four keyword domains: "Global Health", "Curriculum", "Teaching Model", and "Higher Education". The analysis comprised performance analysis and science mapping techniques, including co-authorship analysis, Global North-South collaboration assessment, co-citation analysis, keyword co-occurrence and clustering, and burst detection to identify emerging research fronts. Results: Global health education has experienced rapid development over the past decade, with the number of publications increasing from 9 in 2014 to 38 in 2020, and maintaining a relatively high level since then. Developed countries, particularly the United States, are leading the field in terms of publication volume (n = 121, 57.9%), while Global South institution's participation remained limited (28.9%). North-South collaborations were uneven, with 77.6% of curricula incorporating collaborative development elements but only 57.9% reflecting co-authorship partnerships in transnational studies. According to the co-occurrence analyses of keywords, the most frequently occurring teaching models are "Interprofessional learning" (n = 9), "Competency-based education" (n = 8), "Online learning" (n = 7), "Experiential learning" (n = 4) and "Community-engaged learning" (n = 4). Conclusion: This study provides a comprehensive evaluation of global health curriculum teaching models, highlighting key developments and trends. The field has advanced markedly but reflects persistent inequities in knowledge production and resource allocation. Future efforts must prioritize equitable North-South collaboration, culturally adapted competency frameworks, and inclusive technological integration to foster a globally representative workforce capable of addressing interconnected health challenges. Moving forward, global health education should embrace dynamic, forward-thinking approaches to prepare a versatile workforce capable of tackling both current and future global health challenges.
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.