Bibliometric Analysis of COVID-19 Health Disparities Research

• Main Author: Slagel, Barbara J
• Format: Dissertation
• Language: English
• Published: ProQuest Dissertations & Theses 01.01.2022
• Subjects: Health care management; Mental health; Psychology; Public health
• ISBN: 9798352964767

During the COVID-19 pandemic, research related to health disparities emerged with supporting evidence that inequities experienced in other areas of health were replicated during the pandemic. Large amounts of research can make it difficult to develop an overview of a complex topic such as this one. Bibliometric analyses, including data visualization techniques, shed light on the field of study and are applied here to health disparities research during the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 5049 publications from January 1, 2020, to March 31, 2022, were identified in the Web of Science database by combining topic search terms for COVID-19 and health disparities. After data validation, the data set yielded 5001 articles suitable for analysis. Performance analysis was used to evaluate the data in terms of proliferation of articles in various journals and in identification of disciplines conducting research. Using extractions of sources, citations, and abstracts, visualization of data was produced, including citations, co-citations, bibliographic coupling, keywords, and data-mined terms. Public health disciplines produced the most research related to COVID-19 health disparities, followed by disciplines related to health care, internal medicine, and psychology. With multidisciplinary interest in this research area, no single journal produced more than 4% of the total 1251 publications. The International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, PLOS ONE, Frontiers in Public Health, and the Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities published the highest number of articles on the topic. The United States, England, and Canada are the nations that produced the largest number of articles. Co-authorship by organizations primarily occurred within individual countries, although collaborations were also observed between countries. Harvard University served as a notable collaborator. Analysis of citations, co-citations, and bibliographic coupling showed a variety of clusters with the most focus on public health including global health, infection prevention, and psychosocial behaviors. Analysis of keywords and terms extracted from the text of article titles and abstracts resulted in three primary themes: COVID-19 related predictors and outcomes, global health crisis, and mental health issues. The cluster related to global health crisis tended to have qualitative research and most often used the terms “inequity” and “inequality.” The cluster related to predictors and outcomes tended to have quantitative research methods and used the term “disparity” most often. The global health crisis cluster and the predictors and outcomes cluster were clearly separated on the terms map. Mental health-related terms and the terms related to structural racism and vaccine hesitancy form a bridge between these two distinct areas which are indications of interdisciplinary influences. Concepts from social sciences are used by medical and public health researchers. The terms used by U.S. researchers more frequently than by researchers outside of the United States are “race,” “black,” “white,” and “race ethnicity.” For U.S. based studies, “Black” or “African American,” “Latino” or “Hispanic,” and “Sexual and Gender Minorities” are the groups mentioned by COVID-19 researchers most often in their abstracts. Overall, bibliometric analysis with visualization provides an efficient and effective method for analyzing large amounts of research literature. A complex topic such as health disparities during the COVID-19 pandemic can be explored by using these techniques. Researchers can use the analysis to understand the current state of research and to discover opportunities for future research. For health disparities, the results indicate more cross-disciplinary research may be beneficial and lead to improvement in public health policy and health care practices. A partnership between social scientists and health care professionals can aid in the effort to create effective public policy to reduce health disparities.