The aims of this study are to see the development of clinical practice guides (CPG) in the field of social sciences, to evaluate its development especially in terms of health management, to identify the prominent subjects in the future, and to discover the relationships among the important subjects of CPGs. Bibliometric mapping method has been used in this study. The studies analyzed by bibliometric mapping were downloaded from the Web of Science Core Collection database and analyzed by the SciMAT science mapping program. The analysis was conducted with the data arranged within the time frames of '1990-1999', '2000-2009' and '2010-2019'. 'Words' were used as the primary analysis parameter. The data gathered from published studies were assessed by strategic diagrams, overlap map, thematic evolution map as well as thematic network map. Performance analysis of the emerging themes was done with the information of h-index and the total citation number of the studies included in bibliometric mapping. This study showed that the most publications on CPG were released in 2017, the USA was the high-ranking country in these publications, the important motor themes were determined as 'clinical guidelines' in the first period, 'clinical practice guidelines' and 'quality' in the second period, and 'management' and 'implementation' in the third period. It can be concluded that, in parallel with the increase of the publications on CPGs, the number of new relevant keywords will continue to increase. It is also evaluated that the studies on applying CPGs into practice, determining the experiences and attitudes of healthcare professionals towards CPGs, diminishing the obstacles on the way of implementing CPGs, evaluating CPGs from the managerial point of view and the effects of CPGs on the healthcare services in terms of quality, efficiency and outcomes will continue to increase soon.
Keywords: Uygulama rehberleri; bibliyometri; rehberlere uyum; sağlık personelinin tutumu; sağlık hizmetleri kalitesi; yaşam kalitesi
Bu çalışmanın amacı, klinik uygulama rehberleri (KUR)nin sosyal bilimler alanındaki gelişimini görmek, özellikle sağlık yönetimi açısından bu gelişimi değerlendirmek, gelecekte öne çıkan konuları belirlemek ve KUR'ların önemli konuları arasındaki ilişkileri keşfetmektir. Araştırmada bibliyometrik haritalama yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Araştırmaya dâhil edilen makaleler Web of Science Core Collection veri tabanından indirilmiş ve SciMAT bilim haritalama programı aracılığıyla analiz edilmiştir. Analiz, veriler '1990-1999', '2000-2009' ve '2010-2019' periyotlarına ayrılarak gerçekleştirilmiş ve analiz birimi olarak 'kelimeler' kullanılmıştır. Araştırma bulguları stratejik diyagramlar, örtüşme haritası, tematik gelişim haritasının yanı sıra tematik ağ ilişkileri haritası ile değerlendirilmiştir. Ortaya çıkan temaların performans değerlendirmeleri h-index ve toplam atıf sayısı ile yapılmıştır. KUR hakkında en fazla yayının 2017 yılında yapıldığı, en fazla yayın yapan ülkenin ABD olduğu, en önemli motor temaların 1. dönemde 'clinical guidelines', ikinci dönemde 'clinical practice guidelines' ve 'quality', üçüncü dönemde ise 'management' ve 'implementation' temaları olduğu görülmüştür. KUR konusunda yapılan yayınların artışına paralel olarak kullanılan yeni anahtar kelimelerin sayısının da artmaya devam edeceği, KUR'ların uygulamaya aktarılmasına, sağlık çalışanlarının KUR'lara yönelik deneyim ve tutumlarının belirlenmesine, KUR'ların kullanılmasının önündeki engellerin azaltılmasına, KUR'ların yönetim perspektifinden değerlendirilmesine, KUR'ların sağlık hizmetleri kalitesine, etkinliğine, sonuçlarına ve etkilerine ilişkin çalışmaların yakın gelecekte de yapılmaya devam edeceği değerlendirilmektedir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Practice guidelines; bibliometrics; guideline adherence; attitude of health personnel; quality of health care; quality of life
- WHO. Guidelines for WHO guidelines. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003. [Link]
- NICE. The guidelines manual. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence; 2012. [Link]
- Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Standards for Developing Trustworthy Clinical Practice Guidelines. Clinical practice guidelines we can trust. Graham R, Mancher M, Miller Wolman D, Greenfield S, Steinberg E, editors. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2011. [PubMed]
- Institute of Medicine (US) Committee to Advise the Public Health Service on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Clinical Practice Guidelines: Directions for a New Program. Field MJ, Lohr KN, editors. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 1990. [PubMed]
- DOH. A first class service: quality in the new NHS. London: Department of Health; 1998. [Link]
- Miller M, Kearney N. Guidelines for clinical practice: development, dissemination and implementation. Int J Nurs Stud. 2004;41(7):813-21. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Kavuncubaşı Ş, Yıldırım S. Hastane ve Sağlık Kurumları Yönetimi. 2. Baskı. Ankara: Siyasal Yayın Dağıtım; 2010.
- RCPCH. Setting standards for development of clinical guidelines in paediatrics and child health. 5th ed. London: Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health; 2020. accessed on: May 11, 2021 [Link]
- IOM. Knowing What Works in Health Care: A Roadmap for the Nation. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine of The National Academies; 2008. [Link]
- Shaneyfelt TM, Centor RM. Reassessment of clinical practice guidelines: go gently into that good night. JAMA. 2009;25;301(8):868-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Schünemann HJ, Fretheim A, Oxman AD; WHO Advisory Committee on Health Research. Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 1. guidelines for guidelines. Health Res Policy Syst. 2006;21;4:13. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Schünemann HJ, Wiercioch W, Etxeandia I, Falavigna M, Santesso N, Mustafa R, et al. Guidelines 2.0: systematic development of a comprehensive checklist for a successful guideline enterprise. CMAJ. 2014;18;186(3):E123-42. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- SIGN. SIGN 50: a guideline developer's handbook. Edinburgh: Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network; 2015. [Link]
- Martínez MA, Cobo MJ, Herrera M, Herrera-Viedma E. Analyzing the scientific evolution of social work using science mapping. Research on Social Work Practice. 2015;25(2):257-77. [Crossref]
- Holden G, Rosenberg G, Barker K. Bibliometrics in Social Work. 1st ed. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press; 2005.
- Börner K, Chen C, Boyack KW. Visualizing knowledge domains. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. 2003;37(1):179-255. [Crossref]
- Cobo MJ, López-Herrera AG, Herrera-Viedma E, Herrera F. Science mapping software tools: review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2011;62(7):1382-1402. [Crossref]
- Börner K, Huang W, Linnemeier M, Duhon RJ, Phillips P, Ma N, et al. Rete-netzwerk-red: analyzing and visualizing scholarly networks using the Network Workbench Tool. Scientometrics. 2010;83(3):863-76. [Crossref]
- Cobo MJ, López-Herrera AG, Herrera-Viedma E, Herrera F. SciMAT: A new science mapping analysis software tool. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2012;63(8):1609-30. [Crossref]
- Batagelj V, Mrvar A. Pajek-program for large network analysis. Connections. 1998;21(2):47-57. [Link]
- Borgatti SP, Everett MG, Freeman LC. Ucinet for windows: software for social network analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies; 2002. [Link]
- Shannon P, Markiel A, Ozier O, Baliga NS, Wang JT, Ramage D, et al. Cytoscape: a software environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks. Genome Res. 2003;13(11):2498-504. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Chen C. CiteSpace II: detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology. 2006;57(3):359-77. [Crossref]
- Accessed on: March 17, 2020. [Link]
- Jacso P. As we may search-comparison of major features of the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar citation-based and citation-enhanced databases. Current Science. 2005;89(9):1537-47. [Link]
- Geahigan PC, Geahigan G. Guidelines for computer literature searching in art education. Studies in Art Education. 1982;23(3):48-60. [Crossref]
- Tabak A, Barbak A, Öztürk T. [Is it possible to understand the conceptual evolution of public policy discipline using bibliometrics?: science mapping analysis of 1980-2014 period]. EUL Journal of Social Sciences. 2016;7(2):117-43. [Link]
- Cahlik T. Comparison of the maps of science. Scientometrics. 2000;49(3):373-87. [Crossref]
- Callon M, Courtial JP, Laville F. Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: the case of polymer chemsitry. Scientometrics. 1991;22(1):155-205. [Crossref]
- Coulter NS, Monarch I, Konda S. Software engineering as seen through its research literature: a study in co-word analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 1998;49(13):1206-23. [Crossref]
- Courtial JP. A coword analysis of scientometrics. Scientometrics. 1994;31(1):251-60. [Crossref]
- He Q. Knowledge discovery through co-word analysis. Library Trends. 1999;48(1):133-59. [Link]
- Cobo MJ, Martínez MA, Gutiérrez-Salcedo M, Fujita H, Herrera-Viedma E. 25 years at knowledge-based systems: a bibliometric analysis. Knowledge-Based Systems. 2015;80:3-13. [Crossref]
- Murgado-Armenteros EM, Gutiérrez-Salcedo M, Torres-Ruiz FJ, Cobo MJ. Analysing the conceptual evolution of qualitative marketing research through science mapping analysis. Scientometrics. 2015;102(1):519-57. [Crossref]
- Díaz-López C, Carpio M, Martín-Morales M, Zamorano M. Analysis of the scientific evolution of sustainable building assessment methods. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2019;49:101610. [Crossref]
.: Process List