Next Article in Journal
Urban Flood Modeling and Risk Assessment with Limited Observation Data: The Beijing Future Science City of China
Previous Article in Journal
The Impact Mechanism of Household Financial Debt on Physical Health in China
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 20
Issue 5
10.3390/ijerph20054642
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

A Bibliometric Analysis of Stroke Caregiver Research from 1989 to 2022

by
Mohd Azmi Bin Suliman
*,
Tengku Muhammad Hanis
,
Mohd Khairul Anwar Kamdi
,
Mohd Ismail Ibrahim
and
Kamarul Imran Musa
*
Department of Community Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian 16150, Malaysia
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20(5), 4642; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20054642
Submission received: 24 January 2023 / Revised: 27 February 2023 / Accepted: 1 March 2023 / Published: 6 March 2023
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Many stroke survivors suffer with varying degrees of disability and require assistance. Family members commonly act as informal caregivers, caring for these stroke survivors and ensuring care adherence. However, many caregivers reported a poor quality of life and physical and psychological distress. Due to these issues, multiple studies have been conducted to understand the experience of caregivers, the outcomes of caregiving, and interventional studies among caregivers. This study aims to explore the intellectual landscape of studies on stroke caregivers using bibliometric analysis. Studies with “stroke” and “caregiver” terms in the title were extracted from the Web of Sciences (WOS) database. The resulting publications were analysed using the ‘bibliometrix’ package in R. There were 678 publications analysed, dating from 1989 to 2022. The USA has the highest number of publications (28.6%), followed by China (12.1%) and Canada (6.1%). The most productive institution, journal and author were The University of Toronto (9.5%), ‘Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation’ journal (5.8%) and Tamilyn Bakas (3.1%), respectively. Co-occurrences keywords analysis revealed mainstream research on stroke survivors, burden, quality of life, depression, care, and rehabilitation, reflecting the timeless hotspot in the field. This bibliometric analysis helps us understand the current state of stroke caregiver research and its recent developments. This study can be used to evaluate research policies and promote international cooperation.

1. Introduction

Stroke is a significantly debilitating disease, and its frequency is anticipated to increase worldwide [1]. Despite improving mortality and morbidity rates among stroke patients, stroke survivors may acquire residual impairment. Acute stroke episodes affect stroke patients and people close to them. In addition, stroke survivors also often experience considerable distress. Many family members reported they did not anticipate the stroke attack, and most were unprepared for the consequences [2].
As stroke changes the lives of stroke patients and those close to them, stroke episodes bring new expectations and roles, such as the caregiver. Those close to the stroke patient adapt to this new role of caregiver, giving physical, emotional, economic and spiritual support and trying their best to fulfil the stroke survivor’s needs [3,4]. To adapt to these changes, caregivers need to equip themselves with appropriate knowledge, skills and abilities which are essential for the stroke survivors’ care and the caregiver’s well-being. The rehabilitation team, especially the stroke physician, rehabilitation nurse, occupational therapist and physiotherapist, play essential roles in helping the caregivers to gain new knowledge. Healthcare workers must see caregivers as integral to stroke care to ensure stroke survivors adhere to care plans and therefore get closer to their pre-stroke condition [5].
Unfortunately, caring for a relative with morbidity can place strain upon caregivers. Stroke caregivers often report developing varying degrees of physical and psychiatric problems. Some caregivers develop tiredness, insomnia, anxiety and depression, which lead to poor quality of life [6,7]. Thus, stroke care plans should focus on stroke survivors and include caregivers as an integral part of treatment regimes. In addition, stroke survivors and caregivers dyad approaches should be adapted and tailored to the needs of stroke survivors and their caregivers [5,8].
In this sense, the caregiver is the focus of attention, which justifies the development of this research. Given the overall burden of stroke and the importance of stroke caregivers, it is unsurprising that there has been considerable research in this field. There are spectra of journals that cover this field, ranging from broad topic journals such as “BMJ Open”, to more specific topic journals such as “Topic in Stroke Rehabilitation” and “Stroke”.
Bibliometrics analysis has been around for several decades. Bibliometric analysis has recently gained traction with the increased availability of databases and software [9,10]. Bibliometric analysis is a statistical method with two main techniques: (1) performance analysis, which is to measure the production of scientific research and trends, and (2) scientific mapping, which is to examine the relationship of intellectual interactions and structural connections between intellectual constituents. Bibliometric analysis is crucial to map scientific knowledge and establish nuances from the large volume of data and metadata of scientific contributions in respective fields [11]. The analysis may reveal underrepresented areas for generating research opportunities and scientific development. Bibliometric analysis also has been applied to analyse journal publications and compare different journals [12].
While recent studies have covered many aspects of the topic, limited academic publications have tried to understand the research pattern related to stroke caregivers systematically. There were several bibliometric studies on post-stroke care [13] and general caregivers [14], but to the best of our knowledge, this is the first bibliometric study on stroke caregivers. Such an analysis will help delineate the global research trend related to caregivers’ health and the interventions available. This analysis may also help the readers to identify research gaps, especially in underrepresented regions and communities. Researchers and institutions can also use this study’s findings as a benchmark for their research directions and policies.
The main aim of this study is to explore research patterns, specifically (1) identifying influential authors, (2) finding journals that were most represented in studies, (3) finding collaboration patterns between countries, authors, and institutions, and (4) finding significant keywords or hotspots related to stroke caregivers.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design, Search Terms and Study Flow

This study is a bibliometric analysis. First, the criteria for selection were established. To ensure that the publications were relevant to stroke caregivers, we searched publication titles with the term “stroke” and “caregiver”. The list of publications was extracted from the Web of Science Core Collection database from the Web of Science (WOS), which includes Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI). The search term used in the search equation was “(TI = (stroke) AND TI = (caregiver))”, in which we did not limit the time range. The search was performed on 6 December 2022. The selection criteria were limited to articles, reviews, or proceed papers. After the search, BibTeX data were downloaded, containing the details of the publication, including author names, titles, journal names, author keywords, publication years, cited references and abstracts. Two independent researchers validated the search and data extraction.

2.2. Statistical Analysis

There were several analyses performed in this study. The first analysis was a descriptive analysis in which we attempted to quantify total numbers and the top ten for language, country, institution, journal, author, article and keywords related to the field. We also mapped (1) a collaboration network map between countries and institutions, (2) a co-citation network map between journals and authors, and (3) a co-occurrences network map for keywords.
Two parameters were used to identify the most influential publications in the field: the most-cited articles and the highest average citations per year. The decision to use these two parameters was made because most-cited articles may favour older articles; therefore, an adjustment was made to include more recent publications [12].
In identifying the most influential journals in the field, Bradford’s law of scattering was used in this study. Bradford’s law of scattering states that scientific journals can be arranged by productivity and grouped into three zones of an approximately equal number of total publications. Zone 1, or the core zone, is a small group of journals that produce about 33.3% of total publications; Zone 2 is a larger group of journals that make up approximately another 33.3% of total publications; and Zone 3 is the biggest group of journals, which produces the remaining 33.3% of total publications [15]. Therefore, it can be understood that in a specific field, a few core journals produce most of the publications, while most journals only produce a few.
In ensuring the network mapping remained legible and clear, the network maps were limited to the top 25 items (i.e., the top 25 most productive journals, authors, and most common keywords), except for collaboration between countries and institutions. For collaboration networks between institutions, the network maps were limited to the top 10% of institutions, and the names of institutions were not included to avoid overcrowding the plot. For the same reason, so as not to overcrowd the plot, for the collaboration network between countries, countries with no collaboration with other countries were excluded from the plot. Since there was no definite guidance on the number of items to include in the network maps, the number of items was chosen arbitrarily.
The bibliometric analysis was performed using the R (version 4.2.2) within the RStudio (version 2022.07.2) [16,17]. Packages used for the bibliometric analysis include ‘tidyverse’ and ‘bibliometrix’ packages [9,18].

2.3. Ethical Considerations

Ethical review was not required for this study as this study was conducted without any human subjects.

3. Results

3.1. General Information

There were 1006 publications that contained the terms “stroke” and “caregiver” in the title; however, only 678 publications fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The flow of the publication search process is shown in Figure 1.
Among the total 678 publications analysed, the publications were produced between 1989 and 2022. There were more articles (91.7%) than review articles (8.3%). The publications were authored by 2456 authors in 260 journals, and used 1085 keywords (after de-duplication). The total number of citations was 14,749. The number of publications produced annually has fluctuated but generally increased since 2004, with an annual growth rate of 11.4%, as shown in Figure 2.

3.2. Influential Articles

The top ten publications based on the number of citations and the average number of citations per year are shown in Table 1 and Table 2, respectively. Only one publication among the top 10 highly cited publications was produced in the past ten years. Among highly cited publications, most of the publications were quantitative longitudinal studies measuring the quality of life, well-being, and burden of caregivers. When adjusted to the year of publication, the top 10 average citations per year included more recent publications. The publications achieving the top 10 average citations per year were a mixture of quantitative and qualitative research, observational and interventional studies, and review articles.

3.3. Language

The publications were published in nine languages, with most of them in English, at 96.0%, followed by German (1.0%), Portuguese (0.9%), Spanish (0.7%), French (0.6%), Korean (0.3%); the rest were Italian, Russian and Turkish, with 0.1% each.

3.4. Authors

Out of the 678 publications, the number of authors per publication ranged from one author to 27 authors, within which publications with four authors were the most common (21.1%), as shown in Figure 3.
There were 2456 authors in the field, most appearing once (81.4%). As shown in Table 3, Tamilyn Bakas of the USA was the most prolific researcher, with 21 publications.
When mapping the bibliographic coupling of the 25 most productive authors, there were five main clusters, all of which were intercorrelated, as shown in Figure 4.

3.5. Author’s Keyword and WOS’s Keywords-Plus

Among the 678 publications, there were 1085 author’s keywords and 923 WOS keywords-plus. Apart from the term “stroke” and “caregiver”, other common keywords used include “survivors”, “burden”, “quality of life”, “depression”, “care”, and “rehabilitation”. The top 10 keywords for both authors and WOS’s keywords-plus are shown in Table 4.
When the top 25 author’s keyword co-occurrences were mapped, there were three main clusters, all of which were correlated. The authors’ keyword co-occurrences network map is shown in Figure 5.

3.6. Journals

A total of 260 journals have been published in this field. Based on Bradford’s law of scattering, 12 core journals produced 33.0% of total publications, as in Table 5. There were 54 journals in Zone 2 and 194 journals in Zone 3. The top three journals were “Topics In Stroke Rehabilitation” (n = 40), with a 2021 journal impact factor (JIF) of 2.18; “Stroke” (n = 21), with a 2021 JIF of 10.17; and “Rehabilitation Nursing” (n = 21), with a 2021 JIF of 1.46. In Zone 1 of Bradford’s law, there was a mixture of general medical journals and specialist journals related to stroke, rehabilitation and nursing.
The 25 most productive journals were mapped for a co-citation network, in which there was only one cluster and all the journals were correlated, as shown in Figure 6.

3.7. Institutions

The publications in this field were from 1042 institutions, with the University of Toronto having the highest number of publications. The top 10 productive institutions are shown in Table 6.
Among the top 10% of the institutions, there were 11 clusters of collaboration. Most of the clusters were intercorrelated, as shown in Figure 7. The names of the institutions were not included, to avoid overcrowding plot. Refer to Supplementary Table S2 for the labels for each node.

3.8. Countries

Up to 20.1% of the 678 publications had international co-authorships. When analysing the corresponding author’s country, 678 publications were published in 51 countries. The USA has the highest number of publications (28.6%) and total citations (38.4%), as shown in Table 7.
The 51 countries were grouped based on the World Bank’s country income groups (refer to Table S1), which found that high-income countries had the highest number of publications (68.1%), as shown in Table 8.
Among all the corresponding author’s countries, there were three main clusters of collaboration, with the main clusters consisting of countries with a significant contribution to the field, as shown in Figure 8.

4. Discussion

We performed a simple search within the available large body of literature. This bibliometric analysis demonstrates the nature and range of scientific literature on stroke caregivers. This bibliometric analysis can be considered as a surrogate to identify targeted journals and seek international co-authors in the field. To our knowledge, this is the first study to systematically describe influential publications, authors and journals at the international level for studies related to stroke caregivers. There were several key findings worth discussing here, including (1) trends of studies conducted; (2) common keywords used by the authors; (3) collaborations between authors, institutions, and countries; and (4) the importance of these key findings to policymakers and health care providers.
Overall, publications on stroke caregivers have been on the rise since the concept of family caregivers emerged in the 2000s, and especially in the last ten years [35,36]. In our study, we noticed that many influential publications were quantitative longitudinal studies trying to understand caregiving experiences and problems arising coincidentally. However, when adjusted to the year of publication, the top 10 publications by average citations per year included more recent publications. Furthermore, the type of studies in the top 10 by average citations per year also varied, including (1) qualitative studies, trying to understand the issues in depth; (2) interventional studies, both focusing on the caregiver and the caregiver–survivor dyad; and (3) review papers, in which many authors were trying to synthesise the various findings of previous studies. This trend suggests that globally, researchers are interested in multi-faceted issues related to stroke caregivers, and in trying to tackle or improve these issues [37]. However, when trying to understand the most cited articles, the readers need to be aware that the analysis may favour older articles [12].
In our study, almost all the studies were in English, as expected. This should not be surprising, as English is the global lingua franca, even for science and technology. While publishing in English may not be easy for non-English speakers, publications in English are more accessible to worldwide readers [38].
Stroke caregivers’ concepts are multidimensional, and among them, this study identified several keywords commonly used by authors. In the literature, in addition to the term “stroke” and “caregiver”, other related terms such as “survivor”, “burden”, “quality of life”, “depression”, “family”, and “care” were closely related to stroke caregivers. These terms reflect (1) the key player in stroke caregiving (i.e., the stroke caregiver, stroke survivors and their family members), (2) the typical issues that stroke caregivers face (e.g., burden, quality of life and depression), and (3) their needs (e.g., stroke care, stroke rehabilitation and the health of both stroke survivors and caregivers). We, however, wanted to caution the reader that since in this bibliometric analysis we include both original articles and reviews, the keywords may be inflated when they appeared in both original articles and reviews that may consist of the aforementioned original articles. This was expected, but we can consider the keywords influential and important if they repeatedly appeared both in original articles and reviews [10,11].
Our study identified the core journals according to Bradford’s law of scattering to indicate the most influential journals. As mentioned previously, the core journals in this field were a mixture of general medical journals and specialist journals, including stroke-related journals, rehabilitation-related journals, and nursing-related journals. In addition, all the journals in the core journals group were high-impact journals. Choosing peer-reviewed journals with high impact is vital to ensure that the findings of the studies are valid, thus guaranteeing the quality of the evidence [39]. This is important because many policymakers and healthcare providers depend on high-quality evidence [40]. Many authors also consider several factors in selecting the journals they want to publish, such as high visibility journals, which are indicated by high impact, open access, database indexation, a swift review process, a high acceptance rate and low fees [41].
When looking at the corresponding authors’ countries of origin, high-income countries such as the United States, Canada and China predominantly contributed to publications. Coincidently, most of the most influential institutions in this field also primarily come from the North American region, with some mixture with institutions from Europe and Asia, suggesting that most studies were carried out in high-income countries. The findings reflect general trends previously identified in stroke caregivers research [37]. From another perspective, many middle-income and low-income countries had higher stroke burdens [42], and the number of people with stroke needing care has increased rapidly in developing countries [42]. The GBD 2019 Stroke Collaborator reported that the mortality rate and stroke-related disability-adjusted life expectancy among low-income countries were 3.6 and 3.7 times worse, respectively, than high-income countries [43]. Still, our study found that corresponding authors from low-income countries were severely underrepresented. Unfortunately, the lack of publications among middle-income and low-income countries may suggest that these countries faced more significant challenges and threats because of inadequate service support [44].
Upon further investigation, the countries’ collaboration network maps in our studies show three main clusters, which may indicate mixed signs. On the one hand, we applaud good international collaboration, as illustrated by the largest cluster in our study. Studies from different countries and institutions were intercorrelated with each other. Some of the studies on middle-income and low-income countries were authored by researchers from institutions in high-income countries. For example, Yan et al. (2016) consisted of a team of authors from China, the USA, Peru and other countries, being affiliated with high-income countries, but the article discussed stroke care in low- and middle-income countries [45]. Publishing in the common lingua franca also encourages international collaboration [38]. Unfortunately, on the other hand, there was also a lack of cooperation in some other countries. Variation in healthcare systems, cultures, family structures and care arrangements across countries and regions can lead to different health problems and countermeasures for caregivers, which may be reasons for the inconsistency in international cooperation in this field of research [34,46,47]. To navigate these global healthcare issues, professionals in public health should collaborate.
Our study also makes clear that the different publications have covered a broad spectrum of knowledge in the field, which includes (1) understanding the caregivers’ experience; (2) the complications, and the determinants of the complications; and (3) interventions that target not only stroke survivors, but target stroke caregivers too. Furthermore, given the increasing reliance on caregivers in healthcare, research on stroke caregivers has become more important than ever.
In addition, several research gaps were identified in this study, including a lack of participation of researchers from low-income countries. Researchers and institutions may use the findings of this study as guidelines for future research, including research direction and policy.

Strength and Limitations

Within this data-driven research, there are several methodological benefits: (1) the procedure is transparent and reproducible; (2) this study is scalable, meaning researchers can adjust the boundaries of data features accordingly; and (3) the quantitative method of measuring the research’s impact and academic performance is reliable [48].
However, one of the limitations of this study concerns the search terms. By limiting the search terms to the publication titles, we can ensure that the publications analysed fulfil inclusion criteria. However, we might miss relevant publications that might not contain both “stroke” and “caregiver” terms in the title. These publications were excluded because they were not well catalogued and were not published according to our inclusion criteria.
In addition, this bibliometric study was performed in a manner akin to a cross-sectional study, meaning we did not examine the trend of the studies related to stroke caregivers. By comparing analyses at several time points, we may identify dynamic and thematic changes over time [10]. However, this was beyond the scope of this manuscript, and we would recommend further studies to explore trends.
Apart from WOS, several databases such as Scopus and PubMed can provide information for bibliometric analysis. Each database has its own data collection policy which affects the scope of the publication and the number of citations. However, inconsistencies in the citation indexes and metadata structures make it challenging to include all the databases in a single bibliometric analysis. Other bibliometric research has also been known to have this limitation [49].
Nonetheless, we would like to stress that our bibliometric research was different from that of other review articles, as review articles emphasise search strategies, the eligibility of studies and the risk of bias evaluation, whereas bibliometric research instead provides a bigger picture of trends and topic areas.

5. Conclusions

Thus far, we have reviewed, analysed and discussed articles on stroke caregivers published in peer-reviewed journals between 1989 and 2022. The number of stroke caregiver studies has increased recently, and scholars from various countries are collaborating to achieve their academic goals. Understanding of current research trends outlines the knowledge map in the research field and helps to find gaps that require further study. While we identified that most studies on stroke caregivers were concentrated in high-income countries, there is a need for further research on stroke caregivers, especially in low-income and middle-income countries, as they were found to be more in need of a care support system for stroke caregivers.
Finally, researchers specialising in stroke caregivers can set benchmarks for themselves and network with peers by using the resources analysed within this bibliometric analysis.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijerph20054642/s1, Table S1. Number of Publications by Countries and Income Group, R script. Table S2: Institution Collaboration Cluster by Colour (Figure 7).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.A.B.S., T.M.H. and K.I.M.; Methods: M.A.B.S. and T.M.H.; Investigation, M.A.B.S. and M.K.A.K.; Formal Analysis, M.A.B.S. and T.M.H.; Writing—original draft, M.A.B.S.; Writing—Review and Editing, M.A.B.S., T.M.H., M.K.A.K., M.I.I. and K.I.M.; Supervision, M.I.I. and K.I.M.; funding acquisition, M.I.I. and K.I.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was funded by The Newton-Ungku Omar Fund, a matching grant from the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia (University Sains Malaysia 203.PPSP.6780003) and the Medical Research Council, UK (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine MR/T018968/1).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The BibTeX data can be publicly accessed via https://zenodo.org/record/7421945 (accessed on 11 January 2023).

Acknowledgments

This study would have been impossible without the direct and indirect contribution of the MyStroke team (https://medic.usm.my/mystroke/ (accessed on 23 December 2022)). We also would like to thank the editor and unnamed reviewers wholeheartedly.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the manuscript.

References

  1. Saini, V.; Guada, L.; Yavagal, D.R. Global Epidemiology of Stroke and Access to Acute Ischemic Stroke Interventions. Neurology 2021, 97, S6–S16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Kuriakose, D.; Xiao, Z. Pathophysiology and Treatment of Stroke: Present Status and Future Perspectives. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 7609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Mei, Y.-X.; Lin, B.; Zhang, W.; Yang, D.-B.; Wang, S.-S.; Zhang, Z.-X.; Cheung, D.S.K. Benefits Finding among Chinese Family Caregivers of Stroke Survivors: A Qualitative Descriptive Study. BMJ Open 2020, 10, e038344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Gawulayo, S.; Erasmus, C.J.; Rhoda, A.J. Family Functioning and Stroke: Family Members’ Perspectives. Afr. J. Disabil. 2021, 10, 801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Mou, H.; Wong, M.S.; Chien, W.T. Effectiveness of Dyadic Psychoeducational Intervention for Stroke Survivors and Family Caregivers on Functional and Psychosocial Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2021, 120, 103969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Pucciarelli, G.; Ausili, D.; Galbussera, A.A.; Rebora, P.; Savini, S.; Simeone, S.; Alvaro, R.; Vellone, E. Quality of Life, Anxiety, Depression and Burden among Stroke Caregivers: A Longitudinal, Observational Multicentre Study. J. Adv. Nurs. 2018, 74, 1875–1887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Gertrude, N.; Kawuma, R.; Nalukenge, W.; Kamacooko, O.; Yperzeele, L.; Cras, P.; Ddumba, E.; Newton, R.; Seeley, J. Caring for a Stroke Patient: The Burden and Experiences of Primary Caregivers in Uganda—A Qualitative Study. Nurs. Open 2019, 6, 1551–1558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Bakas, T.; McCarthy, M.; Miller, E.T. Update on the State of the Evidence for Stroke Family Caregiver and Dyad Interventions. Stroke 2017, 48, e122–e125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Aria, M.; Cuccurullo, C. Bibliometrix: An R-Tool for Comprehensive Science Mapping Analysis. J. Informetr. 2017, 11, 959–975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Donthu, N.; Kumar, S.; Mukherjee, D.; Pandey, N.; Lim, W.M. How to Conduct a Bibliometric Analysis: An Overview and Guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 133, 285–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zupic, I.; Čater, T. Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization. Organ. Res. Methods 2015, 18, 429–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Brandt, J.S.; Hadaya, O.; Schuster, M.; Rosen, T.; Sauer, M.V.; Ananth, C.V. A Bibliometric Analysis of Top-Cited Journal Articles in Obstetrics and Gynecology. JAMA Netw. Open 2019, 2, e1918007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Ma, W.; Li, X.; Yang, Y.-B.; Zhai, Y.; Xie, T.-T.; Gong, Z.-Y.; Lan, B.; Liu, J.; Mo, X.-N. Bibliometric Analysis of Global Research Trends in Post-Stroke Depression: Hotspots and Frontiers. Front. Public Health 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Dong, J.; Wei, W.; Wang, C.; Fu, Y.; Li, Y.; Li, J.; Peng, X. Research Trends and Hotspots in Caregiver Studies: A Bibliometric and Scientometric Analysis of Nursing Journals. J. Adv. Nurs. 2020, 76, 2955–2970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Nash-Stewart, C.E.; Kruesi, L.M.; Del Mar, C.B. Does Bradford’s Law of Scattering Predict the Size of the Literature in Cochrane Reviews? J. Med. Libr. Assoc. 2012, 100, 135–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  17. RStudio Team. RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R; RStudio: Boston, MA, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  18. Wickham, H. Tidyverse: Easily Install and Load the Tidyverse; RStudio: Boston, MA, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  19. McCullagh, E.; Brigstocke, G.; Donaldson, N.; Kalra, L. Determinants Of Caregiving Burden and Quality of Life in Caregivers of Stroke Patients. Stroke 2005, 36, 2181–2186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Jönsson, A.C.; Lindgren, I.; Hallström, B.; Norrving, B.; Lindgren, A. Determinants Of Quality of Life in Stroke Survivors and Their Informal Caregivers. Stroke 2005, 36, 803–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Elmståhl, S.; Malmberg, B.; Annerstedt, L. Caregiver’s Burden of Patients 3 Years After Stroke Assessed by A Novel Caregiver Burden Scale. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 1996, 77, 177–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Grant, J.S.; Elliott, T.R.; Weaver, M.; Bartolucci, A.A.; Giger, J.N. Telephone Intervention with Family Caregivers of Stroke Survivors After Rehabilitation. Stroke 2002, 33, 2060–2065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Rigby, H.; Gubitz, G.; Phillips, S. A Systematic Review of Caregiver Burden Following Stroke. Int. J. Stroke 2009, 4, 285–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Pollock, A.; St George, B.; Fenton, M.; Firkins, L. Top 10 Research Priorities Relating to Life After Stroke-Consensus from Stroke Survivors, Caregivers, and Health Professionals. Int. J. Stroke 2014, 9, 313–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Bugge, C.; Alexander, H.; Hagen, S. Stroke Patients’ Informal Caregivers-Patient, Caregiver, and Service Factors That Affect Caregiver Strain. Stroke 1999, 30, 1517–1523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Morimoto, T.; Schreiner, A.S.; Asano, H. Caregiver Burden and Health-Related Quality of Life Among Japanese Stroke Caregivers. Age Ageing 2003, 32, 218–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Draper, B.M.; Poulos, C.J.; Cole, A.M.; Poulos, R.G.; Ehrlich, F. A Comparison of Caregivers for Elderly Stroke and Dementia Victims. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 1992, 40, 896–901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Cameron, J.I.; Gignac, M.A. “Timing It Right”: A Conceptual Framework for Addressing the Support Needs of Family Caregivers to Stroke Survivors From The Hospital To The Home. Patient Educ. Couns. 2008, 70, 305–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Loh, A.Z.; Tan, J.S.; Zhang, M.W.; Ho, R.C. The Global Prevalence of Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms Among Caregivers of Stroke Survivors. J. Am. Med. Dir. Assoc. 2017, 18, 111–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Pindus, D.M.; Mullis, R.; Lim, L.; Wellwood, I.; Rundell, A.V.; Abd Aziz, N.A.; Mant, J. Stroke Survivors’ and Informal Caregivers’ Experiences of Primary Care and Community Healthcare Services-A Systematic Review and Meta Ethnography. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0192533. [Google Scholar]
  31. Bakas, T.; Clark, P.C.; Kelly-Hayes, M.; King, R.B.; Lutz, B.J.; Miller, E.L. Evidence For Stroke Family Caregiver and Dyad Interventions A Statement for Healthcare Professionals from The American Heart Association and American Stroke Association. Stroke 2014, 45, 2836–2852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Zorowitz, R.D.; Gillard, P.J.; Brainin, M. Poststroke Spasticity Sequelae and Burden on Stroke Survivors and Caregivers. Neurology 2013, 80, S45–S52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Forster, A.; Dickerson, J.; Young, J.; Patel, A.; Kalra, L.; Nixon, J.; Smithard, D.; Knapp, M.; Holloway, I.; Anwar, S.; et al. A Structured Training Programme for Caregivers of Inpatients After Stroke (TRACS): A Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Lancet 2013, 382, 2069–2076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Qiu, X.; Sit, J.W.H.; Koo, F.K. The influence of Chinese culture on family caregivers of stroke survivors: A qualitative study. J. Clin. Nurs. 2018, 27, e309–e319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Lund, M. Caregiver, Take Care. Geriatr. Nurs. 2005, 26, 152–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Bakas, T.; McCarthy, M.J.; Miller, E.L. Systematic Review of the Evidence for Stroke Family Caregiver and Dyad Interventions. Stroke 2022, 53, 2093–2102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Kum, C.; Miller, E.L.; Jones, H.; Kean, E.B.; Kreitzer, N.; Bakas, T. Theoretically Based Factors Affecting Stroke Family Caregiver Health: An Integrative Review. West. J. Nurs. Res. 2022, 44, 338–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Kamadjeu, R. English: The Lingua Franca of Scientific Research. Lancet Glob. Health 2019, 7, e1174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  39. London, B. Reviewing Peer Review. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2021, 10, e021475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Likis, F.E. Where Should You Publish? Choosing a Journal for Your Manuscript. J. Midwifery Womens Health 2018, 63, 7–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  41. Bavdekar, S.B.; Save, S. Choosing the Right Journal for a Scientific Paper. J. Assoc. Physicians India 2015, 63, 56–58. [Google Scholar]
  42. Katan, M.; Luft, A. Global Burden of Stroke. Semin. Neurol. 2018, 38, 208–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Feigin, V.L.; Stark, B.A.; Johnson, C.O. GBD 2019 Stroke Collaborators Global, Regional, and National Burden of Stroke and Its Risk Factors, 1990–2019: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet Neurol. 2021, 20, 795–820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Pandian, J.D.; William, A.G.; Kate, M.P.; Norrving, B.; Mensah, G.A.; Davis, S.; Roth, G.A.; Thrift, A.G.; Kengne, A.P.; Kissela, B.M.; et al. Strategies to Improve Stroke Care Services in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review. Neuroepidemiology 2017, 49, 45–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Yan, L.L.; Li, C.; Chen, J.; Miranda, J.J.; Luo, R.; Bettger, J.; Zhu, Y.; Feigin, V.; O’Donnell, M.; Zhao, D.; et al. Prevention, Management, and Rehabilitation of Stroke in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. eNeurologicalSci 2016, 2, 21–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Githaiga, J.N. Culture, Role Conflict and Caregiver Stress: The Lived Experiences of Family Cancer Caregivers in Nairobi. J. Health Psychol. 2017, 22, 1591–1602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Tseung, V.; Jaglal, S.B.; Salbach, N.M.; Cameron, J.I. Implementing Caregiver Support Programs in a Regional Stroke System. Stroke 2019, 50, 3585–3591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Belter, C.W. Bibliometric Indicators: Opportunities and Limits. J. Med. Libr. Assoc. 2015, 103, 219–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Zhu, J.; Liu, W. A Tale of Two Databases: The Use of Web of Science and Scopus in Academic Papers. Scientometrics 2020, 123, 321–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Ijerph 20 04642 g001 550
Figure 1. Publication search process flow.
Figure 1. Publication search process flow.
Ijerph 20 04642 g001
Ijerph 20 04642 g002 550
Figure 2. Annual scientific production (n = 678).
Figure 2. Annual scientific production (n = 678).
Ijerph 20 04642 g002
Ijerph 20 04642 g003 550
Figure 3. Number of authors per publication (n = 678).
Figure 3. Number of authors per publication (n = 678).
Ijerph 20 04642 g003
Ijerph 20 04642 g004 550
Figure 4. Co-citation network map between authors (n = 25).
Figure 4. Co-citation network map between authors (n = 25).
Ijerph 20 04642 g004
Ijerph 20 04642 g005 550
Figure 5. Author’s keywords co-occurrence network map (n = 25).
Figure 5. Author’s keywords co-occurrence network map (n = 25).
Ijerph 20 04642 g005
Ijerph 20 04642 g006 550
Figure 6. Co-citation network map between journals (n = 25).
Figure 6. Co-citation network map between journals (n = 25).
Ijerph 20 04642 g006
Ijerph 20 04642 g007 550
Figure 7. Collaboration network map between institutions 1: cluster 1—red, cluster 2—dark blue, cluster 3—orange, cluster 4—purple, cluster 5—light blue, cluster 6—green, cluster 7—grey, cluster 8—pink, cluster 9—light brown, cluster 10—dark brown and cluster 11—light green (n = 104).1 Refer to Table S2 for labels for each node.
Figure 7. Collaboration network map between institutions 1: cluster 1—red, cluster 2—dark blue, cluster 3—orange, cluster 4—purple, cluster 5—light blue, cluster 6—green, cluster 7—grey, cluster 8—pink, cluster 9—light brown, cluster 10—dark brown and cluster 11—light green (n = 104).1 Refer to Table S2 for labels for each node.
Ijerph 20 04642 g007
Ijerph 20 04642 g008 550
Figure 8. Collaboration network map between countries (n = 27).
Figure 8. Collaboration network map between countries (n = 27).
Ijerph 20 04642 g008
Table
Table 1. Top 10 articles with the most citations.
Table 1. Top 10 articles with the most citations.
RankTitleAuthor, YearNumber of CitationsAverage Number of Citations per Year
1Determinants Of Caregiving Burden and Quality of Life in Caregivers of Stroke PatientsMcCullagh et al., 2005 [19]27715.39
2Determinants Of Quality of Life in Stroke Survivors and Their Informal CaregiversJönsson et al., 2005 [20]22012.22
3Caregiver’s Burden of Patients 3 Years After Stroke Assessed by A Novel Caregiver Burden ScaleElmståhl, Malmberg and Annerstedt, 1996 [21]2097.74
4Telephone Intervention with Family Caregivers of Stroke Survivors After RehabilitationGrant et al., 2002 [22]2049.71
5A Systematic Review of Caregiver Burden Following StrokeRigby, Gubitz and Phillips, 2009 [23]19213.71
6Top 10 Research Priorities Relating to Life After Stroke-Consensus from Stroke Survivors, Caregivers, and Health ProfessionalsPollock et al., 2014 [24]19021.11
7Stroke Patients’ Informal Caregivers-Patient, Caregiver, and Service Factors That Affect Caregiver StrainBugge, Alexander and Hagen, 1999 [25]1837.63
8Caregiver Burden and Health-Related Quality of Life Among Japanese Stroke CaregiversMorimoto, Schreiner and Asano, 2003 [26]1809.00
9A Comparison of Caregivers for Elderly Stroke and Dementia VictimsDraper et al., 1992 [27]1775.71
10“Timing It Right”: A Conceptual Framework for Addressing the Support Needs of Family Caregivers to Stroke Survivors From The Hospital To The HomeCameron and Gignac, 2008 [28]17011.33
Table
Table 2. Top 10 articles by average citations per year.
Table 2. Top 10 articles by average citations per year.
RankTitleAuthor, YearNumber of CitationsAverage Number of Citations per Year
1The Global Prevalence of Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms Among Caregivers of Stroke SurvivorsLoh et al., 2017 [29]13121.83
2Top 10 Research Priorities Relating to Life After Stroke-Consensus from Stroke Survivors, Caregivers, Additionally, Health ProfessionalsPollock et al., 2014 [24]19021.11
3Stroke Survivors’ and Informal Caregivers’ Experiences of Primary Care and Community Healthcare Services-A Systematic Review and Meta EthnographyPindus et al., 2018 [30]8216.40
4Evidence For Stroke Family Caregiver and Dyad Interventions A Statement for Healthcare Professionals from The American Heart Association and American Stroke AssociationBakas et al., 2014 [31]14315.89
5Determinants Of Caregiving Burden and Quality of Life in Caregivers of Stroke PatientsMcCullagh et al., 2005 [19]27715.39
6Poststroke Spasticity Sequelae and Burden on Stroke Survivors and CaregiversZorowitz, Gillard and Brainin, 2013 [32]14014.00
7A Systematic Review of Caregiver Burden Following StrokeRigby, Gubitz and Phillips, 2009 [23]19213.71
8A Structured Training Programme for Caregivers of Inpatients After Stroke (TRACS): A Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial and Cost-Effectiveness AnalysisForster et al., 2013 [33]8512.64
9The influence of Chinese culture on family caregivers of stroke survivors: A qualitative studyQiu, Sit and Koo, 2018 [34]6012.60
10Determinants Of Quality of Life in Stroke Survivors and Their Informal CaregiversJönsson et al., 2005 [20]22012.22
Table
Table 3. The most productive authors (n = 2486).
Table 3. The most productive authors (n = 2486).
RankAuthor NameNumber of Publications, n (%)
1Tamilyn Bakas21 (3.1)
2Joan S. Grant15 (2.2)
3Barbara J Lutz13 (1.9)
=4David L Roth12 (1.8)
=4Ercole Vellone12 (1.8)
=6William E Haley11 (1.6)
=6Gerald C H Koh11 (1.6)
=6Gianluca Pucciarelli11 (1.6)
=9Rosario Alvaro10 (1.5)
=9Jill I Cameron10 (1.5)
=9Amy Forster10 (1.5)
=9Linda L Pierce10 (1.5)
=9Victoria Steiner10 (1.5)
Table
Table 4. Top 10 most relevant keywords: author’s keywords and WOS’s keyword-plus.
Table 4. Top 10 most relevant keywords: author’s keywords and WOS’s keyword-plus.
RankAuthor’s KeywordPublications,
n (%)		WOS’s Keyword-PlusPublications,
n (%)
1Stroke453 (66.8)Survivors181 (26.6)
2Caregivers198 (29.2)Burden179 (26.4)
3Caregiver118 (17.4)Quality-of-life149 (21.9)
4Depression82 (12.0)Family caregivers137 (20.2)
5Quality Of Life73 (10.7)Care136 (20.0)
6Rehabilitation70 (10.3)Health132 (19.4)
7Burden44 (6.4)Impact114 (16.8)
8Family Caregivers44 (6.4)Rehabilitation88 (12.9)
9Caregiver Burden38 (5.6)Depression75 (11.0)
10Anxiety30 (4.4)Spouses75 (11.0)
Table
Table 5. List of journals in Zone 1 of Bradford’s law of scattering (n = 678).
Table 5. List of journals in Zone 1 of Bradford’s law of scattering (n = 678).
RankJournal NameNumber of Publications, n (%)
1Topics In Stroke Rehabilitation40 (5.8)
2Stroke29 (4.2)
3Rehabilitation Nursing21 (3.0)
4Journal of Neuroscience Nursing20 (2.9)
5Journal of Clinical Nursing18 (2.6)
6Journal of Advanced Nursing17 (2.5)
7Disability and Rehabilitation16 (2.3)
8Rehabilitation Psychology15 (2.2)
9BMJ Open14 (2.0)
10Clinical Rehabilitation13 (1.9)
11Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation11 (1.6)
12Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences10 (1.4)
Table
Table 6. Most productive institution (n = 1042).
Table 6. Most productive institution (n = 1042).
RankInstitutionNumber of Publications,
n (%)
1University of Toronto65 (9.5)
2University of Florida60 (8.8)
3The University of Alabama at Birmingham49 (7.2)
4National University of Singapore38 (5.6)
5The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston36 (5.3)
6University of Cincinnati34 (5.0)
7Chinese University of Hong Kong31 (4.5)
8Maastricht University26 (3.8)
=9Università degli studi di Roma Tor Vergata26 (3.8)
=9Zhengzhou University26 (3.8)
Table
Table 7. Top 10 most productive countries and number of total citations by country.
Table 7. Top 10 most productive countries and number of total citations by country.
Highest Number of PublicationsHighest Number of Total Citations
RankCountryNumber of Publications,
n (%)		RankCountryTotal
Citations		Average
Article
Citations
1USA193 (28.6)1USA472024.46
2China82 (12.1)2United Kingdom147250.76
3Canada41 (6.1)3Canada145535.49
4Netherlands33 (4.9)4China124015.12
5United Kingdom29 (4.3)5Netherlands118335.85
6Brazil24 (3.6)6Sweden73749.13
7Australia23 (3.4)7Australia59025.65
8Turkey21 (3.1)8Korea31917.72
=9Korea18 (2.7)9Italy28919.27
=9Singapore18 (2.7)10Denmark277277.00
Table
Table 8. Top 10 most productive countries and number of total citations by the World Bank’s country income groups.
Table 8. Top 10 most productive countries and number of total citations by the World Bank’s country income groups.
World Bank Country Income GroupNumber of Publication, n (%)Total CitationsAverage Article Citations
High Income462 (68.1)12,42126.89
Upper-Middle Income172 (25.4)179610.44
Lower-Middle Income39 (5.6)3549.08
Low Income2 (0.3)115.50
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bin Suliman, M.A.; Hanis, T.M.; Kamdi, M.K.A.; Ibrahim, M.I.; Musa, K.I. A Bibliometric Analysis of Stroke Caregiver Research from 1989 to 2022. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 4642. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20054642

AMA Style

Bin Suliman MA, Hanis TM, Kamdi MKA, Ibrahim MI, Musa KI. A Bibliometric Analysis of Stroke Caregiver Research from 1989 to 2022. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023; 20(5):4642. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20054642

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bin Suliman, Mohd Azmi, Tengku Muhammad Hanis, Mohd Khairul Anwar Kamdi, Mohd Ismail Ibrahim, and Kamarul Imran Musa. 2023. "A Bibliometric Analysis of Stroke Caregiver Research from 1989 to 2022" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 20, no. 5: 4642. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20054642

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop