Information from the abstract
BACKGROUND: The relationship between late-life loneliness and mental health among older adults has received increasing attention. However, there is a lack of systematic analysis that specifically compares how Chinese- and English-language research conceptualizes loneliness to mental health outcomes in the elderly. METHODS: CiteSpace and VOSviewer were used to analyze and visualize publication features and research hotspots. English and Chinese literature were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC) and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), respectively, from the inceptions of these databases to December 31, 2024. RESULTS: A total of 690 English-language and 58 Chinese-language publications were included. The United States (U.S.) and China were main contributors, with English-language publications exhibiting an apparent annual increase. A global collaborative network has formed across multiple countries. Leading journals in geriatric psychiatry were the primary outlets for high-impact research. In contrast, Chinese-language publications were fewer and less influential. Nevertheless, the keyword analysis of both corpora identified a shared research focus: associations among loneliness, late-life depression (LLD), and cognitive decline. CONCLUSION: This bibliometric analysis offers a comprehensive comparison of the English- and Chinese-language research on late-life loneliness in psychiatry through 2024, highlighting increasing global interest in loneliness and identifying future priorities.
Why this record is monitored
This record has an Impact Signal of 71/100 based on recency, source, collaboration, and bibliographic signals. It prioritizes monitoring and is not a judgment of research quality.
Related topics: Health disparities and outcomes · scientometrics and bibliometrics research · Aging, Health, and Disability
Thai researcher and institutional participation
Nahathai Wongpakaran · Tinakon Wongpakaren · Chiang Mai University
Data limitations
This page is a bibliographic record based on abstract-level information, not a full analysis or quality assessment. Verify the DOI and original article before citation.