نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار، علم اطلاعات و دانش‌شناسی، گروه علم اطلاعات و دانش‌شناسی، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران

2 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد، علم‌سنجی، گروه علم اطلاعات و دانش‌شناسی، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران

چکیده

مقدمه: با وجود ارزش حیاتی مدیریت دانش برای فعالیت‌های بهداشت و درمان، در متون مختلف از این بخش به عنوان آخرین بخشی که مدیریت دانش را پذیرفته، یاد شده است. با توجه به این که اطلاعات کافی درباره وضعیت موضوعی حوزه مدیریت دانش پزشکی در دسترس نیست، هدف از انجام پژوهش حاضر، استفاده از روش‌های علم‌سنجی در کمک به فهم جریان دانش و شناخت مباحث کلیدی این حوزه و نمایان ساختن ساختار فکری این حوزه بود.روش بررسی: این مطالعه توصیفی با رویکرد علم‌سنجی و به روش تحلیل هم‌واژگانی و با استفاده از فن خوشه‌بندی سلسله مراتبی انجام شد. جامعه آماری آن شامل 868 مدرک مرتبط با موضوع در پایگاه PubMed طی بازه زمانی سال‌های 1980 تا 2017 بود. همچنین، 200 مقاله فارسی که تا سال 1396 در پایگاه‌های Magiran، Noormags، SID (Scientific Information Database) و نمایه استنادی علوم ایران نمایه شده بودند، بررسی گردید.یافته‌ها: رشد تولیدات علمی مدیریت دانش در حوزه پزشکی در فارسی و لاتین سیر صعودی داشت. ضریب رشد مقالات لاتین و فارسی به ترتیب 98/2 و 31/2 گزارش شد. با رسم نمودار خوشه‌بندی، کلید واژه‌های مقالات لاتین در 14 خوشه موضوعی و کلید واژه‌های مقالات فارسی در 10 خوشه موضوعی قرار گرفت. بررسی شباهت موضوعی مقالات فارسی و لاتین نشان داد که تنها 13 کلید واژه مشترک در بین اعضای خوشه‌های موضوعی به چشم می‌خورد که در خوشه‌های متفاوت پراکنده شده بود.نتیجه‌گیری: با بررسی کلید واژه‌های هسته و مرکزی پژوهش، چنین استنباط می‌شود که نگرش جامعه پزشکی به مدیریت دانش بیشتر یک نگرش خدمت‌گرایانه است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Intellectual Structure of Knowledge in the Field of Medical Knowledge Management: A Co-Word Analysis

نویسندگان [English]

  • َAfsaneh Hazeri 1
  • Moazameh Goruhi 2

1 Associate Professor, Knowledge and Information Science, Department of Knowledge and Information Science, School of Social Sciences, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran

2 MSc Student, Scientometrics, Department of Knowledge and Information Science, School of Social Sciences, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran

چکیده [English]

Introduction: Despite the importance of knowledge management in healthcare, this sector is widely viewed within the literature, as accepting the concept last. There is not enough information on the topical content of the field of medical knowledge management. Therefore, this study, using scientometrics approaches, attempted to assist the understanding of knowledge trends, identifying core topics, and revealing the intellectual structure of knowledge in this field.Methods: This was a descriptive, scientometric research, using co-word analysis and hierarchical clustering. The research materials consisted of 868 documents in the PubMed, for the period 1980-2017, that included the term “Knowledge Management” in the title and in the abstract fields. In addition, 200 Persian articles related to the topic, which were covered in Persian databases such as Magiran, Noormagz, the Scientific Information Database (SID) and the Persian Science Citation Index (PSCI) were included.Results: There was a positive growth in both sets of documents with a ratio of 2.98 for English and 2.31 for Persian articles. The keywords of English and Persian papers were clustered in 14 and 10 thematic clusters, respectively. To identify similarities between the two groups of documents, clustering results were compared visually. Only 13 common keywords were presented in the thematic clusters of Persian and English documents, and these were scattered across different clusters.Conclusion: Identifying and clustering core keywords lead to the conclusion that knowledge management in the field of medicine is mostly service-oriented.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Knowledge Management
  • Co-Word Analysis
  • PubMed
  • Clustering
  1. Girard J, Girard J. Defining knowledge management: Toward an applied compendium. Online Journal of Applied Knowledge Management 2015; 3(1): 1-20.
  2. World Health Organization. WHO knowledge management glossary. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO; 2006.
  3. Tomita Y, Akagi M. Quantitative change in the knowledge base of medical undergraduate education. J Kyorin Med Soc 2018; 49(4): 277-86.
  4. Islami V. Knowledge the Enemy of Diseases. Salamat News [Online]. [cited 2014 Nov 22]; Available from: URL: http://www.salamatnews.com/news/128160/ [In Persian].
  5. Khajefard G, Vahdat S, Hesam S. Factors affecting the success of knowledge management in healthcare systems in the province of Bushehr 2013. J Health Adm 2014; 17(56): 56-64. [In Persian].
  6. Shahmoradi L, Safadari R, Jimma W. Knowledge management implementation and the tools utilized in healthcare for evidence-based decision making: A systematic review. Ethiop J Health Sci 2017; 27(5): 541-58.
  7. Van Beveren, J. Does health care for knowledge management? J Knowl Manag 2003; 7(1): 90-5.
  8. Laal M. Knowledge management in higher education. Procedia Comput Sci 2011; 3: 544-9.
  9. Akhavan P, Oliyaee E, Dastranj Mamaghani N, Saghafi F. Developing knowledge management cycle processes based on knowledge management success factors. Journal of Science and Technology Policy 2011; 3(2): 1-12. [In Persian].
  10. Alajmi B, Marouf L, Chaudhry AS. Knowledge management (KM) practices - a study of KM adoption among doctors in Kuwait. International Scholarly and Scientific Research and Innovation 2015; 9(1): 128-34.
  11. Sedighi, M. Application of word co-occurrence analysis method in mapping of the scientific fields (Case study: The field of informetrics). Libr Rev 2016; 65 (1-2): 52-64.
  12. He Q. Knowledge discovery through co-word analysis. Libr Trends 1999; 48(1): 133-59.
  13. Ahmadi H, Osareh F. Co-word analysis concept, definition and application. National Studies on Librarianship and Information Organization 2017; 28(1): 125-45.
  14. Makkizadeh F, Hazeri A, Hosininasab S, Soheili F. thematic analysis and scientific mapping of papers related to depression therapy in PubMed. J Health Adm 2016; 19(65): 51-63. [In Persian].
  15. Serenko A, Bontis N, Booke, L, Sadeddin K, Hardie T. A scientometric analysis of knowledge management and intellectual capital academic literature (1994-2008). J Knowl Manag 2010; 14(1): 3-23.
  16. Lee MR, Chen TT. Revealing research themes and trends in knowledge management: From 1995 to 2010. Knowl-Based Syst 2012; 28: 47-58.
  17. Tsai HH. Knowledge management vs. data mining: Research trend, forecast and citation approach. Expert Syst Appl 2013; 40(8): 3160-73.
  18. Kokol P, Zlahtic B, Zlahtic G, Zorman M, Podgorelec V. Knowledge management in organizations - a bibliometric analysis of research trends. In: Uden L, Hericko M, Ting IH, editors. Knowledge Management in Organizations, KMO 2015. Lecture notes in business information processing. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, Cham; 2015. vol. 224, p. 3-14.
  19. Gaviria-Marin M, Merigo JM, Baier-Fuentes H. Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 2019; 140: 194-220.
  20. Sedighi M, Jalalimanesh A. Study of research trend in knowledge management field (2001-2010) and mapping its structure. Iranian Journal of Information Processing Management 2013; 28(2): 363-92. [In Persian].
  21. Katebi F. A co-word analysis of knowledge management in Web of Science during 1993-2012 in order to visualizing the constituting of infrastructure of this area [MSc Thesis]. Ahvaz, Iran: Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz; 2014. [In Persian].
  22. Ebrahimi V. A study of the interdisciplinary nature of knowledge management through the subject mapping of related documents [MSc Thesis]. Yazd, Iran: Yazd University; 2014. [In Persian].
  23. Moradi S. A study of the subject structure of knowledge management articles related to the fields of information science and knowledge studies, through citation analysis [MSc Thesis]: Yazd, Iran: Yazd University; 2016. [In Persian].
  24. Leydesdorff L, Rotolo D, Rafols I. Bibliometric perspectives on medical innovation using the medical subject Headings of PubMed. J Am Soc Inf Sci Tec 2012; 63(11): 2239-53.
  25. Leydesdorff L, Comins JA, Sorensen AA, Bornmann L, Hellsten I. Cited references and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) as two different knowledge representations: Clustering and mappings at the paper level. Scientometrics 2016; 109(3): 2077-91.
  26. Hazeri A, Tavakolizadeh Ravari M, Ebrahimi V. Similarity of subjects in knowledge management literature (Using betweenness centrality indicator). National Studies on Librarianship and Information Organization 2016; 27(2): 112-28. [In Persian].
  27. Wang P, Zhu FW, Song HY, Hou JH, Zhang JL. Visualizing the academic discipline of knowledge management. Sustainability 2018; 10(3): 682.
  28. Hazeri A, Tavakolizadeh Ravari M, Ebrahimi V. A study of subject overlap between the main categories of knowledge management within the web of science. Iranian Journal of Information Processing Management 2015; 30(4): 997-1023. [In Persian].