Partner violence in healthcare settings on breastfeeding mothers: a scientometric analysis

Data collection and annual publications

A total of 415 peer-reviewed articles were derived from the Scopus database from 1977 to 2022.

Most productive regions and countries

A multitude of countries have made significant scholarly contributions to the field of Partner Violence in Healthcare Settings, particularly impacting Breastfeeding Mothers, spanning a period from 1977 to 2022 ( Figure 1 and Table 2). This section meticulously elucidates the scholarly output of the dominant countries in this domain. Table 2 delineates the data pertaining to the annual publication numbers, and Table 3 details the top five countries that have immersed themselves in publishing research related to Partner Violence in Healthcare Settings on Breastfeeding Mothers. The rankings were meticulously formulated based on the numerical count of publications.

Figure 1. Shows the annual publication trend for articles related to partner violence and its impact on breastfeeding mothers in healthcare settings, identified from the Scopus database (Wahyutri, 2023).

The graph illustrates the number of articles published each year, from 1977 to 2022. This highlights an overall increase in publications over time, peaking in 2021.

The tabulated data indicate that the United States emerges as the pinnacle of scholarly productivity in this domain, boasting 167 publications, thereby reflecting a pronounced emphasis by its academic community on Partner Violence in Healthcare Settings affecting Breastfeeding Mothers. Following scholarly prominence, Australia secured the second position with 43 publications, while the United Kingdom also asserted its presence significantly, albeit with an unspecified number of publications. There could be a significant selection bias because the search strategy was filtered only for English-language articles. The absence of Asian nations within the rank delineation reveals a potential geographical disparity in research concentration.

Bibliometric coupling (BC) elucidates the network dynamics among nations researching Partner Violence in Healthcare Settings, especially its impact on Breastfeeding Mothers. BC occurs when two documents cite a third, revealing an implicit scholarly connection. Figure 2 visually displays this, where each circle represents a nation and its size indicates scholarly contribution. Notably, the United States has emerged as a significant contributor (Bair-Merritt et al., 2014; Normandin, 2015; Hill et al., 2016; Sood et al., 2016; Messing et al., 2017; Hooker et al., 2020).

Figure 2. BC of countries.

The examination of interlinkages among international authors can be explored via co-authorship analysis segmented by governments. Figure 3 illustrates the collaborative research efforts related to Partner Violence and its impact on Breastfeeding Mothers. The figure highlights the network and various collaborative threads with different colors, with the United States notably establishing robust co-authorship networks, signifying substantial collaboration with authors from various nations (Al-Natour et al., 2014; Scheid et al., 2020; Uysal et al., 2022).

Figure 3. Co-authorship among countries.

Universities and Institutes with the most significant number of publications

Another cardinal element of bibliometric analysis is identifying the most productive academic institutions. Table 4 shows that UNSW Sydney in Australia is the most productive institution, with 11 publications in its name. Western Sydney University and Universidade de São Paulo assume second and third ranks, with nine and eight publications, respectively. In instances of tied rankings, authors are stratified based on the cumulative citation count of their publications.

Top 10 productive sources of publications

The Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and Neonatal Nursing surfaces were the most productive outlets with 17 publications, followed by Midwifery with 15 publications. Table 5 encapsulates journal productivity, detailed in terms of publication count on Partner Violence in Healthcare Settings, impacting Breastfeeding Mothers across all researchers. Five journals originated from a UK-based publisher and a US-based publisher, while seven of the top ten were categorized as Q1 journals.

Top 10 productive authors

Table 6 delineates author productivity, defined in terms of authors and their affiliations, number of publications, citation counts, and total citations per publication. Schmied, affiliated with Western Sydney University, Penrith, Australia, emerged as the author with the most substantial volume of articles, totaling five and accruing 125 citations. While Table 6 lists the top ten productive authors in the field, many of them may also work on topics other than partner violence. Their high citation counts and productivity likely reflect a broader research focus, including areas such as maternal health, nursing, and public health. This should be considered when interpreting the contributions to this specific domain.

The most-cited publication

Identifying highly cited sources is crucial for assessing authors, journals, and papers. Using data from the Scopus database and ‘Partner Violence in Healthcare Settings on Breastfeeding Mothers’ as a search term, a collection of significant publications was compiled. Table 7 presents those that exceed 200 citations, highlighting the most-cited publications in this section.

Three field Plot

A three-field Plot (Sankey diagram) showing the network between original articles on ‘Partner Violence in Healthcare Settings on Breastfeeding Mothers’ from 1977 to 2022.

Visualizing the flow from authors to affiliations and then to keywords might provide insights into which affiliations produce research on which topics ( Figure 4).

Figure 4. A three-field Plot Author - Affiliation – Keywords.

Figure 5 visualizing the flow from journals to keywords and then to countries might provide insights into the kinds of research being published in different journals and where that research is being conducted.

Figure 5. A three-field Plot Journal - Keywords – Countries.

Scientometric main information

The author delved into the topic of “Partner Violence in Healthcare Settings on Breastfeeding Mothers” from 1977 to 2022 and uncovered substantial insights from 415 scientific documents gathered from 259 sources, such as journals and books. The topic has been gradually growing over time, with an annual growth rate of approximately 6.36%, signifying that researchers are increasingly exploring this topic. Observing the average document age of approximately 14.8 years and an average citation per document of approximately 26.71, it is evident that research in this field is not only ongoing but also has a significant impact on the scientific community ( Table 8).

The average age of the documents was 14.8 years with a relatively high average citation per document, standing at 26.71, underscoring the enduring relevance and impact of the existing literature. Furthermore, a substantial number of references, totaling 11,686, and the prolific use of keywords (2,685 Keywords Plus 823 author keywords) mirror the depth and complexity of the discourse. Diving into the authorship and collaboration patterns, the data indicate a notable engagement of 1,651 authors, with a commendable emphasis on collaborative research, as evinced by an average of 4.29 co-authors per document and an international co-authorship percentage of 11.81%. This analysis provides a panoramic view of research conducted on the impact of partner violence on breastfeeding mothers in healthcare settings. This information is crucial for deepening our understanding and potentially discovering new areas for further exploration in future research.

The exploration of thematic occurrences within scholarly publications has become pivotal in the intricacies of academic discourse, where knowledge dissemination is paramount. The provided dataset unveils a multitude of research topics, accompanied by their respective frequencies and temporally oriented quantifiers, including the first, median, and third quartiles of publication years. A myriad of topics such as “domestic violence,” “nursing,” “pregnancy,” “breastfeeding,” and “intimate partner violence” emerge as notably predominant, signaling a substantive focus on humanitarian and child welfare within the academic sphere (Williams et al., 2017; McGarry, 2017; Örmon et al., 2017; Ogbo et al., 2019). Additionally, themes enveloping “stress” and “depression” underscore a robust engagement with mental health discourse (Lepistö et al., 2017) ( Figure 6).

Figure 6. Trend topics.

Within this context, a multifaceted examination of violence and maltreatment is palpable through the prevalence of themes like “domestic violence,” “aggression,” and “mistreatment.” Concurrently, the academic lens is also distinctly cast upon healthcare provision, as illustrated by the recurrent emergence of topics such as “nursing” and “midwifery.” Furthermore, the appearance of “HIV” and “Women’s health” within the dataset indicates a scholarly inclination toward discussions pertaining to sexual and reproductive health, while the recent emergence of “Covid-19” in 2022 embodies the academe’s response to the prevailing global health crisis.

Navigating through the temporal dimensions of the data, “child abuse” elucidates enduring relevance. It spanned 1998 to 2016, thereby showcasing its longstanding and potentially evolving scholarly exploration. Contrarily, topics like “Quality of care” and “Childbirth” manifest a more recent relevance, with medians and third quartiles firmly situated in 2022, indicating a shift toward contemporary issues within the field.

Conducting a historical analysis of topics could reveal shifts in research priorities and intricate intertopical relationships through co-occurrence or network analysis (Lepistö et al., 2017; Sprague et al., 2017). Linking topics to impact metrics, such as citations and, if possible, geographical data, might offer insight into research influence, regional patterns, or global collaborations. Detailed textual analysis can contextualize these topics within academic discussions and highlight the prevailing theoretical frameworks.

The co-occurrence network, illuminated by the authors’ keywords, was analyzed using the biblioshiny app in the bibliometrix environment (De Moraes et al., 2017) ( Figure 7). Co-occurrence network analysis using the author’s keywords showed significant and interlinked topics within a specific research domain. An analysis of the bibliometric data extracted via the Biblioshiny application reveals insights into the interconnected thematic areas in the body of literature related to women’s health, violence, and related healthcare contexts.

Figure 7. Co-occurrence network.

Figure presented a thematic map of key research areas in the domain of partner violence and its impact on breastfeeding mothers. Themes such as Substance Abuse’ and ‘Substance Use Disorder’ or ‘Domestic Violence’ and ‘Violence may appear closely related and overlapping. This categorization reflects the nuanced ways in which these issues are addressed in literature, often using different terminologies in various contexts. The themes were categorized based on keyword frequency and relevance in the analyzed articles, indicating a multifaceted approach to addressing health and violence-related issues in this research domain.

Two main themes emerged prominently in the research: Intimate Partner Violence/Domestic Violence and Nursing/Pregnancy (Olive, 2007; Reisenhofer & Seibold, 2013; Crombie et al., 2017; Ahmad et al., 2017). The former plays a pivotal role, acting as a major connector in the network and potentially tying research on personal relationship violence to various subthemes (Ferri et al., 2016). Meanwhile, Nursing and Pregnancy themes underline a robust research focus on healthcare provision and pregnancy-related issues, exploring the practices and challenges in these areas (McKinley et al., 2019; Van Niel et al., 2020). Table 9 presents the key themes and characteristics of the co-occurrence network.

Biblioshiny-assisted co-occurrence network analysis identified seven key clusters within women’s health research. The Violence and Screening cluster focused on exploring and intervening in violent scenarios. Healthcare Contexts and Substance Abuse delve into management and mitigation strategies in healthcare settings, particularly concerning violence and substance abuse in nursing and emergency departments. Pregnancy and Mental Health emphasize the intertwined relationship between mental health, particularly depression, and pregnancy and abuse. Breastfeeding within the HIV Context cluster potentially provides insights into the guidelines and challenges affecting maternal and child health (Haber et al., 2021). Childbirth and Healthcare Quality, especially in the Covid-19 context, explore the impacts and shifts in practices and provider roles during the pandemic (Vrazo et al., 2020). The Nursing Profession and Women’s Issues cluster highlights the multifaceted role of nurses in navigating challenges and interventions in women’s health. Lastly, Women’s Health and Violence focus on the broad explorations of women’s health, zooming in on violence, and its diverse impacts and management strategies in healthcare.

Moreover, “Depression” and “HIV” stand out as niche themes, potentially providing in-depth insights into specific aspects of broader themes (Mpody et al., 2019; Myburgh et al., 2020; Hampanda et al., 2021). “Covid-19” emerges as a pivotal theme, likely dissecting the pandemic’s diverse impacts on women’s health and healthcare provision, intersecting with various thematic clusters (Janevic et al., 2021). The interplay of these themes offers a nuanced understanding of the domain, showing the interconnectedness of various aspects of women’s health and well-being ( Figure 8).

Figure 8. Thematic map of the journal.

The thematic map and clusters reveal a multifaceted academic dialogue, in which themes intersect and evolve, shaping a nuanced scholarly narrative. The Biblioshiny package in RStudio, using a minimum frequency of three per thousand words, helps navigate the complex thematic map, witnessing the convergence and divergence of themes, each reflecting different scholarly facets. The objective was to interpret thematic clusters and discern their centrality and prominence within the academic environment.

Basic themes like “Substance use disorder,” “Substance abuse,” “Breastfeeding,” and “Pregnancy” act as foundational pillars in the research (Bogen & Whalen, 2019; Yonke et al., 2019). These themes explore the dynamics in their respective domains and serve as connectors to various themes, thereby providing a comprehensive exploration of related topics. Specifically, “Breastfeeding” and “Pregnancy” are crucial in discussing maternal health and well-being in the context of the primary article.

Motor themes, including “Gender-based violence” and “Domestic violence,” serve as core themes that shape the discourse, navigating through various health, socio-legal, and psychological dimensions. This theme explores the intersections and impacts of violence within healthcare and maternal contexts (Martin-de-las-Heras et al., 2019). “Domestic violence,” with high Callon Centrality and cluster frequency, acts as a cardinal node that influences and is influenced by various thematic dynamics (Kalra et al., 2021).

Themes like “Child protective service” and “Australia” indicate areas of emerging or receding research focus, with geographical and sociocultural contexts shaping these themes. “Australia” points to region-specific dynamics (Dawson et al., 2019; Hooker et al., 2020; Coupland et al., 2021). “Depression” might indicate a broader discourse intersecting mental and maternal health, and experiences of violence (Dodge et al., 2019; Janevic et al., 2021).

Niche themes such as “Inpatients” and “HIV” explore specific healthcare settings and medical contexts, while “Intimate partner abuse” and “Adolescents” explore specific demographic and relational dimensions within the broader health and violence discourse (Rujumba et al., 2021). The collective themes craft a multifaceted narrative, intertwining aspects of health, violence, demographics, and potentially geographical and socio-cultural dynamics, potentially hinting at future research trajectories and evolving contexts in this domain. Further exploration could provide deeper insights into the complexities and nuances embedded in this academic discourse.

Limitation

This study had several limitations that require acknowledgment. First, relying solely on the Scopus database and English-language articles may introduce selection bias, potentially overlooking valuable insights from non-English research and limiting the cultural and geographical scope of the study. Additionally, the use of keyword-based search strategies might omit relevant studies that use different terminology. The defined timeframe until 2022 could exclude the newest research developments, and while VOSviewer and RStudio are robust for bibliometric analysis, they may not fully decipher complex data patterns. Moreover, the inherent biases of scientometric and bibliometric analyses could undervalue the contributions of emerging researchers or institutions in low/middle-income countries. Lastly, the quantitative focus might miss the qualitative depth and contextual nuances intrinsic to partner violence that impact breastfeeding mothers in healthcare settings. Future research could overcome these limitations by diversifying data sources, incorporating multilingual studies, and employing both quantitative and qualitative analyses for a more holistic exploration of the domain.