Bibliometric Analysis of Pharmacoeconomic Evaluation Research Literatures in China Based on Chinese Journal Full-text Database / 中国药房

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE： To analyze the development situation of pharmacoeconomic evaluation research in China， and to provide reference for pharmacoeconomics discipline construction. METHODS： China journal full-text database was searched by computer. The searching time was from database establish to Dec. 2018. After collecting the academic papers with the theme of “pharmacoeconomic evaluation”， statistical analysis was made on publication year， source journals， institutions， authors， cooperation publication， citation information and keywords of papers by bibliometric method. RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS： A total of 1 197 literatures were included. The earliest literature was published in 1993， and the largest number （104 pieces） was published in 2015. The literatures came from 289 journals. Among which， China Pharmacy published the largest number of literatures （123 pieces）； the first author came from 619 institutions， which mainly were China Pharmaceutical University （124 pieces）； a total of 2 352 authors were involved， and 923 literatures were completed by two or more authors， with co-authorship rate of 77.1％. The total number times of authors was 3 480， and the degree of cooperation was 2.91. As of April 19， 2019， 975 literatures had been cited. The cited rate was 81.4％， the average citation frequency was 5.83 times， and the H-index was 29. There were a total of 1 922 keywords in the literatures， the top three keywords in the list of frequency were pharmacoeconomics （805 times）， cost-effectiveness analysis （209 times）， and pharmacoeconomic evaluation （98 times）. It could be seen that the research literatures on pharmacoeconomic evaluation in China were published earlier and widely distributed； the research content of the literatures was comprehensive， and some literatures had high influence. But the total number of literatures is still small and is distributed unevenly， and the number of core authors is insufficient， and related research needs to be further developed.