ALL Metrics
-
Views
-
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
Research Article

From classroom to global goals: A bibliometric analysis of Universitas Indonesia’s student projects addressing Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 3

[version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations]
PUBLISHED 03 Jan 2024
Author details Author details
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS

This article is included in the Japan Institutional Gateway gateway.

Abstract

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) represent a vital contribution to both developed and developing nations. It is imperative to assess SDG-related activities to discern the impact of such initiatives across various domains, including health and education. While current bibliometric analyses on SDGs predominantly encompass peer-reviewed articles, it is paramount to acknowledge that SDGs are universally pertinent and necessitate universal engagement. Consequently, there is a compelling need to broaden the bibliometric scope concerning SDGs, surpassing the realm of peer-reviewed papers. This research introduces a pioneering examination of SDG-associated academic undertakings, encompassing undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral research projects on an expansive scale. The evaluative framework stems from a decade’s culminating research endeavours published by Universitas Indonesia (UI). The emphasis of this study was directed towards Good Health and Well-being (SDG 3), given its intricate set of indicators. Furthermore, there remains a paucity of research probing the influence of libraries in the context of SDG 3 indicators within the Indonesian milieu. Through a bibliometric approach, we employed a descriptive analysis to scrutinize the publications’ breadth and evolution. Science mapping facilitated an exploration of inter-topic relationships and spotlighted prominent research themes. The diverse range of research predilections unearthed through our analysis underscores the significance of integrating student research projects into the bibliometric discourse on SDGs. This inquiry aims to heighten recognition of the extensive scholarly contributions by students and ideally will galvanize a younger demographic to immerse themselves in SDG-aligned research pursuits.

Keywords

bibliometric analysis, final student project, good health and well-being, sustainable development goals

Background

Bibliometric analysis applies mathematical and statistical methods to books, journals, and other publications (Roemer & Borchardt, 2015). This type of analysis uses quantitative methods to measure, track, and analyse scientific literature (Roemer & Borchardt, 2015). It allows us to identify developments in a given field, influential authors or researchers, and the most productive journals by subject (Grace, Florence & Florence, 2019). Along with the development of a more active role for librarians in research activities and scientific communication, bibliometric analysis is increasingly being applied in various libraries worldwide. The results can contribute to the development of library collections (Belter & Kaske, 2016). However, the focus of bibliometric activities in academic libraries has changed from collection development to research evaluation by researchers, research groups, departments, and universities (Corrall et al., 2013).

Research evaluation through bibliometric analysis can use several indicators to measure development and trends in scientific activity by evaluating a scientific discipline, institution, journal, or other scientific entity (Anninos, 2014). Herrera-Calderon et al. (2021) explained that the results of bibliometric research can be used to create new knowledge and assist in decision-making. Furthermore, Donthu et al. (2021) described two types of bibliometric analysis techniques: descriptive analysis and science mapping. In addition, network analysis can be utilized to enrich a bibliometric analysis. The descriptive analysis technique aims to determine the contributions that research publications make to specific fields; for example, measurements related to publications (number of publications, number of authors, or productivity per year), citations (number of and average citations), as well as related publications and citations (number of publications cited, h-index, and collaboration index). Meanwhile, science mapping aims to determine the relationships between publications, among others, by analysing citations (citation analysis, co-citation analysis, and bibliographic coupling), words (co-word analysis), and authors (co-authorship analysis).

The application of bibliometric analysis in academic libraries has several benefits, including increasing librarians’ competence, expanding libraries’ role and involvement in decision-making in universities, and increasing the influence and reputation of libraries at universities. Case studies conducted in Sweden, Nigeria, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, and the United Kingdom suggest that academic libraries offer bibliometric analysis services to provide useful information for evaluating the university’s research performance. Libraries are suitable for conducting this type of evaluation because they have a collection of repositories and publication databases that can act as data sources for analysing university publication outputs (Åström & Hansson, 2013; Corrall et al., 2013; Grace et al., 2019).

In libraries and higher education institutions in Indonesia, bibliometric analysis is applied to analyze the use of collections, investigate the development of research on specific topics, and help with the analysis of teaching curriculum needs in library science study programs (Tupan, 2016; Aulia & Rusli, 2020; Amalia & Prasetyawan, 2021). Bibliometric analysis is also used to evaluate the suitability of the contributions of researchers’ publications to a particular vision and mission and the university’s leading research topics (Maryatun & Handayani, 2022). In addition to evaluating individual researchers’ performances, bibliometric analysis can assess the university’s overall research performance. Research is a component considered in university accreditation and ranking in Indonesia (Filiana et al., 2020; Times Higher Education, 2022; UI GreenMetric WUR, 2022).

Libraries’ role in supporting scientific research and communication also involves supporting the 2030 United Nations (UN) agenda. The UN agenda consists of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which provide an integrated framework for economic development and environmental and social factors (Tbaishat, 2021). These goals are targets for countries worldwide to achieve by 2030. In higher education, the issue of sustainable development has been consistently considered necessary over the past decade. In addition to facilities and campus life, sustainable development must be integrated into education and research in universities (Shiel et al., 2020). Thus, access to information through libraries can increase the achievement of the SDGs (Tbaishat, 2021).

As a university library, the Universitas Indonesia (UI) Library has collections, services, and library staff that support the implementation of teaching, research, and community service. The UI library has printed and digital displays, including textbooks, reference books, scientific journals, proceedings, ancient manuscripts, and multimedia collections. The UI Library also has a collection of research from the UI academic community (the UIANA collection), including undergraduate theses, master’s theses, dissertations, final assignments, research reports, and inaugural speeches. To help users access the collection, the UI Library has a reference service (referral service) with several programs, including information literacy training, literature searches via links and emails, guidance on the use of reference sources, E-resources delivery services for UI professors, and document similarity checking (Perpustakaan UI, 2022). UI academicians can also ask for help from a reference librarian in the health, social, and humanities or science and technology clusters to find the literature they need for their research.

Scientific research results from the UI can contribute to the achievement of SDGs. Research results from the UI can also be used as a source of data for Voluntary National Review (VNR) activity, which measures SDG indicator achievements in relation to those 17 objectives. According to the Universitas Indonesia Research Portal, there are 4165 research outputs related to the health sciences cluster or SDG 3 (good health and well-being) – the most compared to other SDGs (Perpustakaan UI, 2022). According to data from SciVal, in 2018–2021, 14.4% of the research conducted at the UI was in the fields of health and medicine (medicine, pharmacology, toxicology, and pharmaceuticals), indicating that this field is the leading research field at the UI (SciVal.com, 2021). These data can help the UI earn a good SDG rating in university rankings, such as THE Impact Ranking and UI GreenMetric. Unfortunately, the scientific works listed on scholar. UI.ac.id do not include those created by UI students, such as undergraduate theses, master’s theses, and dissertations. Therefore, UI students’ research performance should be evaluated according to the SDGs, especially SDG 3.

Several previous studies have used the bibliometric method to examine SDG 3, which relates to good health and well-being. For SDG 3, three major themes were identified: access to universal healthcare, maternal health, and global health. In addition to research on SDG 3, some studies consider specific indicators, including access to health services in rural areas through telemedicine and psychological well-being (suicide death rate) (Da Costa et al., 2020; Palozzi et al., 2020). These three studies used data from the Scopus database.

In Indonesia, several studies have also been conducted in relation to SDG 3; for example, access to health services, especially the mapping of hospitals’ online registration system, and infectious diseases such as tuberculosis and dengue haemorrhagic fever, have been investigated (Dimisyqiyani et al., 2020; Maula et al., 2018; Sebba et al., 2017). However, the number of publications remains lower than those of other ASEAN countries, such as Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, and Vietnam. The three abovementioned studies used the Scopus and PubMed databases as data sources. In addition, this finding indicates that SDG 3 has an important role in the health system in various countries.

Meanwhile, research on libraries’ role in relation to the SDGs, especially SDG 3 indicators, has not been widely performed in Indonesia. Previous research has tended to discuss library programs and librarians’ role in achieving the SDGs (Fatmawati, 2018; Rufaidah & Iskak, 2019; Suprapto & Qosyim, 2022). This study shows that libraries could contribute to achieving SDGs, especially SDG 4 (quality education), by increasing literacy culture. Libraries could implement information literacy workshops, literacy guidance, technology training, information dissemination, and mobile library programs in villages. Librarians need to improve their professional and social competencies, including skills in information technology, media literacy, and information literacy. According to this perspective, research on SDG 3 (good health and well-being), especially studies using the bibliometric method, has been widely conducted. Unfortunately, most existing studies only examined journal articles found through Scopus. This study uses UI students’ final projects as a data source.

Methods

Research design

This quantitative study has a non-experimental, or observational, cross-sectional design. This study used secondary data derived from the metadata of the UI Library collection, especially the undergraduate theses, master’s theses, and dissertations of students from the Faculty of Medicine (FK), Faculty of Dentistry (FKG), Faculty of Public Health (FKM), Faculty of Nursing (FIK), and Faculty of Pharmacy (FF) published from 2011–2020 (Rahmi, 2023). The bibliometric analysis performed in this study adopted the analytical steps of Bradford’s Law regarding the distribution of scientific papers, namely (1) the number of published final assignments, (2) the viewing of sources by faculty, study program, and type of work to identify those that produce the most publications; and (3) the creation of groups based on the topics discussed.

Research location and time

The UI Library Automation and Digital Archive (LONTAR) automation system obtained secondary data in collection metadata. Data were downloaded in March 2022. The data analysis continued until May 2022.

Population and sample

The population used in this research consisted of UI Health Sciences students (Faculty of Medicine, Faculty of Dentistry, Faculty of Public Health, Faculty of Nursing, and Faculty of Pharmacy) who submitted final projects that were published in 2011–2020 and stored in the thesis and dissertation collection of the Universitas Indonesia Library published in 2011–2020 because their final projects are related to SDG 3, Good Health and Well-being. Moreover, the data included in the sample had to meet both inclusion and exclusion criteria. Inclusion criteria consist of the final project for the UI Library collection completed by a UI Health Sciences student (Faculty of Medicine, Faculty of Dentistry, Faculty of Public Health, Faculty of Nursing, and Faculty of Pharmacy); published in the years 2011–2020; and in the form of an undergraduate thesis, master’s thesis, or dissertation. The exclusion criteria are missing data (incomplete); duplication of data; or final work submitted for a specialist or professional program.

In total, there were 13,603 final projects produced by UI Health Sciences students, 10,443 of which were published in the years 2011–2020; 5476 were undergraduate theses, master’s theses, or dissertations, and 2674 of these had missing data (incomplete), duplicated data, or were in the form of specialist and professional program final works.

Data collection technique

Secondary data were collected by downloading the metadata from the UI Library’s final project collection of undergraduate theses, master’s theses, and dissertations published in 2011–2020 by UI Health Sciences students through the UI library’s LONTAR automation system. The data included the authors’ names, counsellors’ names, titles (Indonesian and English), faculty, year of publication, type of work, abstract, study program, subject topic, and keywords.

Researchers collected data by searching the back-office automation system LONTAR UI Library. The search strategy was: 1. A search in the LONTAR back office was carried out in the “Processing > Add Data” menu; 2. A keyword search was done in “264b Publisher Name”; 3. The keywords used were the names of the faculties with collections of final assignments related to SDG 3, including “Faculty of Medicine”, “Faculty of Dentistry”, “Faculty of Public Health”, “Faculty of Nursing”, and “Faculty of Pharmacy”; 4. The type of collection searched was the final project collection, including “UI—Undergraduate Thesis (Open)”, “UI—Undergraduate Thesis (Membership)”, “UI—Master Thesis (Open)”, “UI—Master Thesis (Membership)”, “UI—Dissertation (Open)”, “UI—Dissertation (Membership)”, and “Download”; and 5. After the search results appeared, the data were downloaded in Microsoft Excel (.xlsx) file using Excel version 365.

Data processing

Data processing consisted of data cleaning and data coding. Data cleaning was done by removing missing data (for example, work lacking a title, topic subject), eliminating duplicated data, and correcting writing errors (for example, the year “2104” was updated to “2014”). After the data cleaning process, 3059 final assignments remained, which were then put into categories (coded) according to the 13 targets of SDG 3. The categories used to code the data were: 1. Maternal Health; 2. Baby and Toddler Health; 3. Infectious Diseases; 4. Non-Communicable Diseases and Mental Health; 5. Drug and Alcohol Abuse; 6. Traffic Accidents; 7. Access to Reproductive Health Services; 8. Access to Universal Healthcare; 9. Hazardous Chemicals and Pollution; 10. Tobacco Control (Cigarettes); 11. Drug and Vaccine Development; 12. Health Personnel (HR); and 13. Health Risk Management.

Two “raters” performed the data coding process to improve its reliability: an undergraduate Library Science student and an undergraduate Public Health student. The level of agreement between them serves as an indicator of the quality of the categorisation. Cohen’s Kappa was used to assess the level of agreement between the two raters. The following is an interpretation of the Kappa values (Warrens, 2015).

0.00–0.20 = Low agreement

0.21–0.40 = Sufficient agreement

0.41–0.60 = Moderate agreement

0.61–0.80 = Substantive agreement

0.81–1.00 = Almost perfect agreement

Cohen’s Kappa was measured using GNU PSPP version 1.5.3 software. The Kappa value deter-mined in the test was 0.52, so the raters showed a moderate level of agreement.

Data analysis

Data analysis was performed through descriptive analysis, science mapping, and multivariate analysis.

The descriptive analysis was conducted to visualise the distribution of the variables studied, including the faculty, publication year, type of work, subject topic, and SDG 3 target. The descriptive analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics Standard 28.0 software and Tableau Public version 2022.1.2.

Science mapping was performed to visualise the co-occurrence network of the relationships between topic subjects in the selected work (Ding et al., 2014). VOSviewer software version 1.6.18 was used.

Multivariate analysis was performed using a multinomial logistic regression with predictive models. Multinomial logistic regression was used because the dependent variable in this study (SDG 3) was categorical (13 categories). This type of analysis allows a model consisting of several independent variables that are considered the best to predict the occurrence of the dependent variable to be created (Field, 2018). The multivariate analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics Standard 28.0 software.

Results

Overview of research sites

The Technical Implementation Unit (UPT) of the UI Library was established on 5th March, 1983, according to the Decree of the Minister of Education and Culture No. 0130/O/1983 regarding the Organization and Work Procedures of Universitas Indonesia Article 4 and Article 131-136, which explains the functions, duties, and organisation of the UI Library UPT. In 1987, the UI Library, formerly the UPT Central Library, moved to a new building on the UI Depok Campus. The Central Library then served to coordinate 12 faculty libraries (Perpustakaan UI, 2018).

In 2011, the UI Library moved into a new building dubbed “The Crystal of Knowledge”. This building was constructed according to one of the points of the UI’s strategic plan at the time: integration into the field of facilities. The process of integrating collections into the UI Library UPT started in March 2012. The Central Library, Faculty of Humanities Library, Faculty of Engineering Library, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences Library, Faculty of Nursing Library, and Faculty of Law Library followed. Several other faculties still retain separate libraries but have moved some of their collections to new buildings, namely, the Faculty of Computer Science Library, Faculty of Psychology Library, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences Library, Faculty of Public Health Library, and Faculty of Economic Library (Perpustakaan UI, 2018).

The UI library aims to collect, select, organise, and provide access to various information and knowledge resources for UI Citizens. Therefore, the UI Library collects and preserves library materials that are intellectual works. In addition, the UI Library follows developments in and adopts information and communication technology to improve its services. This is reflected in the vision of the UI Library for 2015–2019. Specifically, “In 2019, Universitas Indonesia Library will become a reference for national and regional university libraries sourced from the intellectual works of UI Citizens, and quality e-resources owned and supported by modern facilities owned by Universitas Indonesia.” The UI Library’s mission is (Perpustakaan UI, 2015): (1) to provide quality access for UI residents and the public to information and knowledge resources, with excellent service based on information and communication technology; (2) to support the research conducted by UI Citizens by providing information and knowledge resources based on information and communication technology; (3) to provide community services for the utilisation of information and knowledge resources mainly via UIANA collections based on information and communication technology at the national and regional scales; and (4) to build entrepreneurship by offering empowering information resources and knowledge based on information technology.

To help realise its vision, the UI Library has support services, collections, and facilities. UI Library Services are grouped into circulation services, reference services, and information technology services. Circulation services include membership activation, borrowing and returning printed books, and a free library certificate (SKBP). Reference services consist of information literacy training, literature searching, guidance on the use of reference sources, e-resource delivery services (EDS), document similarity checking, library utilisation studies, manuscript services, broadcast information, special collection services and journals, and research tools services. Finally, information technology services consist of website access and management services, access to e-resources, and LONTAR development (Perpustakaan UI, 2022).

In addition to these services, the UI Library has various collections to meet users’ information needs. At the end of 2021, the UI Library collections included 3,626,797 titles (3,761,309 total copies). The collections include e-resource collections (88.9%), UIANA collections (5.1%), textbooks (4.4%), printed magazines and journals (1.1%), reference books (0 4%), multimedia collections (0.1%), and ancient manuscripts and classic books (0.1%) (Perpustakaan UI, 2022).

As the data above show, after e-resources (e-books, proceedings, e-journals, online videos, and other electronic resources owned and subscribed to by UI), one of the largest collections in the UI Library is the UIANA collection. The UIANA collection is grey literature consisting of undergraduate theses, master’s theses, dissertations, non-seminar papers, research reports, proceedings, and other scientific works from the UI Academic Civitas (Tyasmara & Susetyo-Salim, 2018). This collection can be accessed in both printed and digital forms.

Total and publication progress

Distribution of final project publications by year of publication

The analysis results presented in Table 1 show the project distribution by publication year. Most of the UI students’ final project publications that were related to SDG 3, Good Health and Well-being, were published in 2019 (23.1%), 2020 (14.7%), and 2018 (13.1%). The number of publications from year to year tended to increase, as shown in Table 2. The average growth rate of the number of publications per year, from 2011–2020, was 29%.

Table 1. Distribution of final project publications by faculty, year of publication, and type of work.

NoVariableN%
1.Faculty
Faculty of Medicine (FK)71626.8
Faculty of Dentistry (FKG)1124.2
Faculty of Public Health (FKM)96035.9
Faculty of Nursing (FIK)51319.2
Faculty of Pharmacy (FF)37313.9
2.Publication year
20111043.9
20121465.5
2013953.6
20142549.5
20152469.2
20162459.2
20172238.3
201835013.1
201961823.1
202039314.7
3.Type of work
Dissertation943.5
Master’s Thesis112742.1
Undergraduate Thesis145354.3
Total2674

Table 2. Development of the number of final project publications per year by faculty and study program.

Faculty and study programNumber of final project publications related to SDG 3%Growth
2011201220132014201520162017201820192020Total
Faculty of Medicine (FK)28920961187343991339771626.7857%
Bachelor of Medical Education289147761221527586837914.1759%
Master of Biomedical Sciences0049129102027121033.8525%
Master of Nutrition Science00044016144331.2351%
Master of Occupational Medicine00137471193451.6838%
Master of Medical Education00133034891671084.04119%
Doctor of Biomedical Sciences00003111133220.8296%
Doctor of Nutrition Science000000011020.07-11%
Doctor of Medical Science00001311450240.90141%
Faculty of Dentistry (FKG)01211162062021151124.1984%
Bachelor of Dentist Education012713156151511853.1857%
Master of Basic Dentistry0003350343210.79-3%
Master of Community Dentistry000000000110.040%
Doctor of Dentistry000100022050.19-22%
Faculty of Public Health (FKM)1751276954788816530210996035.9050%
Bachelor of Nutrition072623122179602.24115%
Bachelor of Environmental Health00040014227381.4265%
Bachelor of Public Health132752919353518614128310.5879%
Bachelor of Occupational Safety and Health200639002211531.98-11%
Master of Epidemiology1114331142112612.28168%
Master of Public Health Sciences07814191322881101829911.1845%
Master of Hospital Administration Studies17942412253061003.7497%
Master of Occupational Safety and Health02224959161501.8727%
Doctor of Epidemiology000001031050.19-30%
Doctor of Public Health Sciences0000210224110.41-6%
Faculty of Nursing (FIK)18743637264547408210851319.1848%
Bachelor of Nursing Science0592021430219525326910.06100%
Master of Nursing Science11416142114262827482268.4518%
Doctor of Nursing Science0102110337180.67-13%
Faculty of Pharmacy (FF)4111104132293926806437313.9543%
Bachelor of Pharmacy41843821183213565528610.70112%
Master of Herbal Science0042513142220.8245%
Master of Pharmaceutical Sciences032151047206582.1761%
Doctor of Pharmacy000010050170.26-22%
Total10414695254246245223350618393267429%

Distribution of final project publications by faculty

As the data analysis presented in Table 2 shows, most of the UI students’ final assignments related to SDG 3 came from the Faculty of Public Health (35.9%) and the Faculty of Medicine (26.8%). Final project publications from other faculties included the Faculty of Nursing (19.2%), the Faculty of Pharmacy (13.9%), and the Faculty of Dentistry (4.2%). In terms of the growth rate in the number of publications, the Faculty of Dentistry has had the highest average annual growth rate (84%), followed by the Faculty of Medicine (57%), the Faculty of Public Health (50%), the Faculty of Nursing (48%), and the Faculty of Pharmacy (43%).

Distribution of final project publications by study program

Based on the results of the data analysis presented in Table 2 most of the publications of the UI students’ final assignments related to SDG 3 came from students completing the Doctoral Education Bachelor Program (14.17%), Master of Public Health Sciences (11.18%), and Bachelor of Pharmacy (10, 7%). As Table 2 shows, the epidemiology master’s degree program has the highest average publication growth rate per year (168%), followed by the medical science doctoral degree (141%) and the medical education master’s degree (119%) programs.

Distribution of final project publications by type of work

The analysis results presented in Table 3 show the distribution by type of work. Most of UI students’ published final assignments related to SDG 3 were undergraduate theses (54%). Master’s theses accounted for 42% of the total, while dissertations accounted for as much as 4%. The number of publications almost always increased yearly for each type of work. Nevertheless, the highest average growth rate in the number of publications per year was in the dissertation collection—as much as 207%.

Table 3. Development of the number of final project publications per year by type of work.

Type of workNumber of final project publications related to SDG 3%Growth
2011201220132014201520162017201820192020Total
Dissertation0103872411715944207%
Master’s Thesis203448631151069922129812311274234%
Undergraduate Thesis84111471881231321228830325514535449%
Total10414695254246245223350618393267410029%

Development of publication topics by year

The topics for UI student thesis publications were chosen by the librarian based on the Library of Congress subject heading. The results of the analysis presented in Figure 1 show that the most common subjects are industrial safety (appearing in 49 publications), breastfeeding (38 publications), industrial hygiene (27 publications), nursing care (25 publications), and tuberculosis (25 publications). In terms of development, the number of subjects studied most frequently changed from year to year. This is demonstrated in Figure 2. In 2011, the most commonly studied subjects were Bacillus thuringiensis, diabetes mellitus, and Dengue haemorrhagic fever, while in 2020, the most frequently researched subjects were nursing care, health education, and reproductive health.

a7befdf3-0400-422b-b56f-311933bcf43b_figure1.gif

Figure 1. The 30 most common topics in UI students’ final project publications related to good health and well-being.

a7befdf3-0400-422b-b56f-311933bcf43b_figure2.gif

Figure 2. Development of the top 5 topic publication subjects by year.

Priority of final project topics related to good health and well-being

SDG 3, Good Health and Well-being, has 13 targets, which are shown in Table 4. Of these 13 targets, most of the UI students’ final project publications had topics related to Target 4, Non-Communicable Diseases and Mental Health (18%), followed by Target 11, Drug and Vaccine Development (17.8%), and Target 13, Health Risk Management (13.2%). Meanwhile, topics related to Target 6 (Traffic Accidents), Target 5 (Abuse of Narcotics and Alcohol), Target 7 (Access to Reproductive Health Services), and Target 10 (Tobacco/Cigarette Control) appear less frequently in UI students’ final assignments. In addition, 14.2% of publications in the “Other” category are not directly related to SDG 3 targets, including topics related to forensics, diagnostics, nutrition, health promotion, and others.

Table 4. Distribution of final project publications related to good health and well-being according to SDG 3 targets.

No.SDG 3 targetsN%
1.Maternal Health1244.6
2.Baby and Toddler Health1555.8
3.Infectious diseases2288.5
4.Non-Communicable Diseases and Mental Health54020.2
5.Drug and Alcohol Abuse110.4
6.Traffic Accidents50.2
7.Access to Reproductive Health Services1003.7
8.Universal Healthcare Access2218.3
9.Hazardous Chemicals and Pollution752.8
10.Tobacco Control (Cigarettes)170.6
11.Drug and Vaccine Development47317.7
12.Health Personnel (HR)1355.0
13.Health Risk Management2469.2
14.Other34412.9
Total2674100

In terms of the growth rate of publications, as Table 5 shows, Target 1 (Maternal Health) has undergone the greatest average annual growth (152%), followed by Target 2 (Infant and Toddler Health) and Target 8 (Universal Healthcare Access). The analysis results presented in Table 6 show which topics have been most frequently studied in each faculty and program. Target 4 (Non-Communicable Diseases and Mental Health) and Target 11 (Development of Drugs and Vaccines) are the most frequently studied topics in all faculties. Table 7 shows the distribution of final project publications related to SDG 3 based on the type of work.

Table 5. Distribution of final project publications related to good health and well-being according to SDG 3 targets by year.

Publication yearSDG 3 Targets
T1T2T3T4T5T6T7T8T9T10T11T12T13T14
2011172210012440334313
20121612173201124238131115
20137452400103002010210
20141015335111108614392640
2015151620580089305392233
2016186224230517604284234
20179613470032410043142628
2018131524602017536456213445
201923484412611137730596206173
202012262890420228479271953
Total1241552285401151002217517473135246344
%4.65.88.520.20.40.23.78.32.80.617.75.09.212.9
Growth176%61%59%46%6%-22%98%42%28%-22%31%37%163%38%

Table 6. Distribution of final project publications related to good health and well-being according to SDG 3 by faculty and study programs.

Faculties and study programsNumber of final project publicationsTotal
T1T2T3T4T5T6T7T8T9T10T11T12T13T14
Faculty of Medicine2734100177102431531541135132716
Bachelor of Medical Education162573920012173843162379
Master of Biomedical Sciences01920006000420223103
Master of Nutrition Science81280000004001033
Master of Occupational Medicine00080001602321445
Master of Medical Education361137103020941121108
Doctor of Biomedical Sciences0045001000800422
Doctor of Nutrition Science000100000000012
Doctor of Medical Science0116002100510724
Faculty of Dentistry2216000010303166112
Bachelor of Dentist Education220300000026015185
Master of Basic Dentistry00120000103201221
Master of Community Dentistry000000000001001
Doctor of Dentistry000100000010035
Faculty of Public Health5684871122339197567105919454960
Bachelor of Nutrition390220011000012360
Bachelor of Environmental Health02850000140008138
Bachelor of Public Health162230200215711502116910283
Bachelor of Occupational Safety and Health10020000100048153
Master of Epidemiology591823001012000261
Master of Public Health Sciences304028321019682334201714299
Master of Hospital Administration Studies1014000550242760100
Master of Occupational Safety and Health00010100200144150
Doctor of Epidemiology011110000000015
Doctor of Public Health Sciences0112003200001111
Faculty of Nursing393335203823612071611660513
Bachelor of Nursing Science2113199942235030321236269
Master of Nursing Science171915944013504127423226
Doctor of Nursing Science11110000200020118
Faculty of Pharmacy025420019302781032373
Bachelor of Pharmacy023310018302131024286
Master of Herbal Science00020000001900122
Master of Pharmaceutical Sciences00290001003900758
Doctor of Pharmacy000000000070007
Total12415522854011510022175174731352463442,674

Table 7. Distribution of final project publications related to good health and well-being according to SDG 3 by type of work.

Type of workNumber of final project publicationsTotal
T1T2T3T4T5T6T7T8T9T10T11T12T13T14
Undergraduate Thesis5975133274445286406325471402081,453
Master’s Thesis64768724061421303511127851051181,127
Dissertation1482610650021311894
Total12415522854011510022175174731352463442,674

Publication topic cluster mapping

Figure 3 shows the results of the word co-occurrence analysis of the topic subject (index keywords) and keywords (author keywords) of UI students’ final project publications related to SDG 3 that were published in 2011–2020. The analysis results led to the following 17 clusters: Cluster 1 – Health Services and Performance of Health Workers; Cluster 2 – Diabetes Prevention and Management; Cluster 3 – HIV/AIDS; Cluster 4 – Non-Communicable Diseases and Mental Health; Cluster 5 – Occupational Health and Safety; Cluster 6 – Dental Health and Mental Health; Cluster 7 – Maternal and Child Health; Cluster 8 – Youth Health; Cluster 9 – Child Development; Cluster 10 – Respiratory Tract Infections; Cluster 11 – Adolescent Reproductive Health; Cluster 12 – Infectious Diseases; Cluster 13 – Maternal Health; Cluster 14 – Health Promotion; Cluster 15 – Drug Abuse; Food Hygiene and Sanitation; Cluster 16 – Cancer; and Cluster 17 – Risk Management.

a7befdf3-0400-422b-b56f-311933bcf43b_figure3.gif

Figure 3. Mapping of UI students’ final project publication clusters related to good health and well-being based on word co-occurrence analysis of subject topics and keywords.

Each cluster associated with SDG 3 targets has links to the following targets:

Cluster 1: Target 8, Target 12

Cluster 2: Target 4, Target 11

Cluster 3: Target 3, Target 7

Cluster 4: Target 4, Target 11

Cluster 5: Target 13

Cluster 6: Target 4, Target 11, Target 14

Cluster 7: Target 1, Target 2

Cluster 8: Target 7, Target 11, Target 14

Cluster 9: Target 2, Target 14

Cluster 10: Target 3, Target 9

Cluster 11: Target 7

Cluster 12: Target 3, Target 11

Cluster 13: Target 1, Target 11

Cluster 14: Target 10, Target 14

Cluster 15: Target 5; Target 14

Cluster 16: Target 4, Target 11

Cluster 17: Target 13

Relationships between faculties, years of publication, and types of work with UI students’ final project publication topics related to good health and well-being

The results of the statistical test that are presented in Table 8 show p-values below the significance level (α) of 0.05, which means that there are significant relationships between the faculty, publication year, and type of work and the topic of UI students’ final project publications in the field of good health and well-being. The coefficient of determination (R2) value of 0.562 indicates that the above factors can explain 56.2% of the variation in the dependent variable, the topic of UI students’ final project publications related to good health and well-being. Other factors can explain the rest of the variation.

Table 8. Relationships between faculty, publication year, and type of work and UI students’ final project publication topics related to good health and well-being.

No.Variablep-ValueR2
1.Faculty0.0000.562
2.Publication year0.001
3.Type of work0.001

A multinomial logistic regression analysis was used to find the variables with the most influence on UI students’ final project publications related to SDG 3. Table 9 presents the regression analysis results, where “Other Topics” was used to compare the relationships between the 13 topics related to SDG 3 and the year of publication, faculty, and work variables. Meanwhile, the Faculty of Pharmacy (FF) and dissertation were used as the comparison groups for the faculty and type of work variables.

Table 9. Multinomial logistics regression analysis results.

No.VariableRegression coefficientp-valueORConfidence interval 95% OR
BSE BLowerUpper
1Maternal health vs. Other topics
Intercept192.493998.3270.847
Publication year-0.1050.0410.010 *0.9000.8310.976
Faculty = FK vs. FF15.717994.9040.9876.6950.000.
Faculty = FKG vs. FF13.908994.9040.9891.0970.000.
Faculty = FKM vs. FF17.331994.9040.98633.6450.000.
Faculty = FIK vs. FF16.813994.9040.98720.0390.000.
Type of Work = Undergraduate Thesis vs. Dissertation1.4371.0480.1704.2090.54032.836
Type of Work = Master Thesis vs. Dissertation1.8231.0480.0826.1900.79448.272
2Baby and toddler health vs. Other topics
Intercept28.55279.8060.721
Publication year-0.0160.0400.6900.9840.9111.064
Faculty = FK vs. FF1.4010.7560.0644.0580.92317.849
Faculty = FKG vs. FF-0.6981.0240.4950.4980.0673.701
Faculty = FKM vs. FF3.1700.753<0.001 *23.8005.442104.100
Faculty = FIK vs. FF2.1470.7620.005 *8.5591.92438.080
Type of work = Undergraduate Thesis vs. Dissertation0.4090.5870.4861.5060.4774.758
Type of work = Master Thesis vs. Dissertation0.6370.5890.2791.8910.5975.992
3Infectious diseases vs. Other topics
Intercept226.76968.738<0.001 *
Publication year-0.1140.034<0.001 *0.8930.8350.954
Faculty = FK vs. FF1.6860.502<0.001 *5.3982.01814.436
Faculty = FKG vs. FF-2.2011.1180.049 *0.1110.0120.990
Faculty = FKM vs. FF2.5040.516<0.001 *12.2344.44633.665
Faculty = FIK vs. FF1.3760.5280.009 *3.9601.40611.151
Type of work = Undergraduate Thesis vs. Dissertation0.3050.4550.5031.3570.5563.313
Type of work = Master Thesis vs. Dissertation0.2170.4610.6381.2420.5033.066
4Non−communicable diseases and mental health vs. Other topics
Intercept-36.82556.5900.515
Publication year0.0180.0280.5121.0190.9641.076
Faculty = FK vs. FF-0.0380.2640.8870.9630.5741.617
Faculty = FKG vs. FF-2.6800.487<0.001 *0.0690.0260.178
Faculty = FKM vs. FF0.3650.2920.2111.4410.8132.552
Faculty = FIK vs. FF0.8960.2790.001 *2.4491.4194.227
Type of work = Undergraduate Thesis vs. Dissertation-0.0580.3380.8650.9440.4861.833
Type of work = Master Thesis vs. Dissertation0.1950.3420.5681.2160.6212.379
5Drug and alcohol abuse vs. Other topics
Intercept-349.9773.000.8740.907
Publication year0.1640.1330.2161.1780.9081.529
Faculty = FK vs. FF14.4182.988.8870.9961.8270.000.
Faculty = FKG vs. FF-3.1550.000.0.0430.0430.043
Faculty = FKM vs. FF15.9132.988.8870.9968.1490.000.
Faculty = FIK vs. FF17.3362.988.8860.99533.8030.000.
Type of work = Undergraduate Thesis vs. Dissertation-0.9851.1720.4010.3740.0383.716
Type of work = Master Thesis vs. Dissertation-0.2521.1380.8240.7770.0837.229
6Traffic accidents vs. Other topics
Intercept380.8754.682.5850.935
Publication year-0.2060.1590.1960.8140.5961.112
Faculty = FK vs. FF2.1834.105.5391.0008.8720.000.
Faculty = FKG vs. FF-2.8510.000.0.0580.0580.058
Faculty = FKM vs. FF17.7964.020.2560.99653.5300.000.
Faculty = FIK vs. FF17.0054.020.2560.99724.2800.000.
Type of work = Undergraduate Thesis vs. Dissertation13.8792.379.3360.9951.0650.000.
Type of work = Master Thesis vs. Dissertation12.7902.379.3370.996358.7150.000.
7Access to reproductive health services vs. Other topics
Intercept144.97088.5780.102
Publication year-0.0730.0440.0940.9290.8531.013
Faculty = FK vs. FF1.7641.0420.0905.8370.75844.967
Faculty = FKG vs. FF-17.0173.553.7340.9960.0000.000.
Faculty = FKM vs. FF3.1991.0410.002 *24.5023.187188.399
Faculty = FIK vs. FF2.9521.0390.004 *19.1452.501146.581
Type of work = Undergraduate Thesis vs. Dissertation-0.4180.5190.4200.6580.2381.821
Type of work = Master Thesis vs. Dissertation-0.3360.5240.5220.7150.2561.997
8Universal healthcare access vs. Other topics
Intercept-175.35483.1020.035 *
Publication year0.0860.0410.036 *1.0901.0061.182
Faculty = FK vs. FF-2.6330.698<0.001 *0.0720.0180.282
Faculty = FKG vs. FF-18.5222.397.0580.9940.0000.000.
Faculty = FKM vs. FF2.3470.413<0.001 *10.4584.65523.492
Faculty = FIK vs. FF-0.4470.4950.3660.6390.2421.686
Type of work = Undergraduate Thesis vs. Dissertation0.1090.5890.8541.1150.3513.538
Type of work = Master Thesis vs. Dissertation0.5770.5870.3261.7800.5635.629
9Hazardous chemicals and pollution vs. Other topics
Intercept-98.171718.2510.891
Publication year0.0400.0560.4661.0410.9341.161
Faculty = FK vs. FF0.2450.6650.7131.2780.3474.706
Faculty = FKG vs. FF-1.8221.1750.1210.1620.0161.619
Faculty = FKM vs. FF2.3810.640<0.001 *10.8163.08737.889
Faculty = FIK vs. FF-13.442353.0820.9700.0000.000.
Type of work = Undergraduate Thesis vs. Dissertation14.293709.4690.9841.6120.000.
Type of work = Master Thesis vs. Dissertation14.275709.4690.9841.5830.000.
10Tobacco control (Cigarettes) vs. Other topics
Intercept-203.9233.098.6820.948
Publication year0.0840.1040.4181.0880.8871.335
Faculty = FK vs. FF15.2792.633.9560.9954.3200.000.
Faculty = FKG vs. FF-3.0288.727.6841.0000.0480.000.
Faculty = FKM vs. FF16.8532.633.9560.99520.8620.000.
Faculty = FIK vs. FF16.9102.633.9560.99522.0680.000.
Type of work = Undergraduate Thesis vs. Dissertation14.1721.618.5620.9931.4280.000.
Type of work = Master Thesis vs. Dissertation15.0031.618.5620.9933.2790.000.
11Drug and vaccine development vs. Other topics
Intercept-72.05463.3590.255
Publication year0.0370.0310.2411.0380.9761.103
Faculty = FK vs. FF-2.0280.226<0.001 *0.1320.0850.205
Faculty = FKG vs. FF-2.9800.290<0.001 *0.0510.0290.090
Faculty = FKM vs. FF-3.8830.396<0.001 *0.0210.0090.045
Faculty = FIK vs. FF-6.2681.026<0.001 *0.0020.0000.014
Type of work = Undergraduate Thesis vs. Dissertation-0.0910.3630.8010.9130.4481.859
Type of work = Master Thesis vs. Dissertation-0.1040.3720.7800.9010.4351.868
12Health Personnel (HR) vs. Other topics
Intercept75.98181.8660.353
Publication year-0.0400.0410.3290.9610.8881.041
Faculty = FK vs. FF0.8261.0650.4382.2850.28318.422
Faculty = FKG vs. FF0.4261.1760.7171.5310.15315.350
Faculty = FKM vs. FF3.3291.0360.001 *27.9063.661212.693
Faculty = FIK vs. FF3.3201.0330.001 *27.6583.650209.566
Type of work = Undergraduate Thesis vs. Dissertation0.0840.6670.9001.0880.2944.022
Type of work = Master Thesis vs. Dissertation0.9760.6610.1402.6530.7269.701
13Health risk management vs. oOher topics
Intercept64.043718.3610.929
Publication year-0.0410.0360.2520.9600.8941.030
Faculty = FK vs. FF15.394714.6970.9834.8470.000.
Faculty = FKG vs. FF12.482714.6980.986263.6310.000.
Faculty = FKM vs. FF17.996714.6970.98065.4000.000.
Faculty = FIK vs. FF15.355714.6970.9834.6600.000.
Type of Work = Undergraduate Thesis vs. Dissertation2.2921.0530.030 *9.8921.25677.892
Type of Work = Master Thesis vs. Dissertation2.1151.0550.045 *8.2931.04965.558

Table 9 presents the regression coefficient (B) and odds ratio (OR) values. These analysis results reveal which topics are more common in a particular faculty compared to other faculties: The greater the B and OR values in a group, the greater the frequency of topic discussion compared to other groups. For example, the group with the largest B and OR scores for maternal health is the Faculty of Public Health (FKM), suggesting that maternal health is most frequently studied by FKM students. The same was found for infant and toddler health, infectious diseases, traffic accidents, access to reproductive health services, hazardous chemicals and pollution, health personnel (HR), and health risk management.

Meanwhile, the Faculty of Pharmacy (FF) excels in the topic of drug and vaccine development, compared with other faculties. Faculty of Nursing (FIK) students have mostly researched non-communicable diseases and mental health, narcotics and alcohol abuse, and tobacco control (cigarettes) compared with other faculties. The complete results are presented in Table 9.

In terms of publication year, the analysis results presented in Table 9 show whether a topic tends to be studied more or less frequently throughout the year. A positive B value for publication year indicates a directly proportional relationship between the frequency of discussion and the year.

Conversely, a negative B value indicates that the frequency of discussion is inversely proportional to the year. This information affirms that non-communicable diseases and mental health, narcotics and alcohol abuse, access to universal health services, hazardous chemicals and pollution, tobacco control (cigarettes), and drug and vaccine development tend to be researched more frequently as the year progresses, while the remaining topics (maternal health, infant and toddler health, infectious diseases, traffic accidents, access to reproductive health services, health personnel, and health risk management) tend to be less and less researched.

In terms of the type of work, several topics are studied more by doctoral students (S-3) than undergraduate (S-1) or master’s (S-2) students, including narcotics and alcohol abuse, access to health services, reproduction, and the development of drugs and vaccines, maternal health, infant and toddler health, non-communicable diseases and mental health, access to universal health services, tobacco control (cigarettes), and health personnel (HR) were most commonly studied by master’s students. For undergraduate students, the most frequently studied topics included infectious diseases, traffic accidents, hazardous chemicals and pollution, and health risk management.

Prediction model for UI students’ final project publication topics related to good health and well-being

The prediction model for UI students’ final project publications related to good health and well-being involved the analysis of the relationship between the subject of publication and the SDG 3 target discussed in the publication. This analysis was conducted using a simple linear regression method to determine the relationships between two or more variables and was intended to predict the value of the dependent variable (SDG 3 target) via the independent variable (publication subject). The dependent variable in a linear regression must be numerical, so the SDG 3 targets were assigned numbers 1–14.

As the statistical test results presented in Table 10 show, the p-value was smaller than the significance level (α) of 0.05, which indicates a significant relationship between the publication subject and UI students’ final project publication topics related to good health and well-being. Furthermore, the correlation value (R) of 0.977 indicates a strong, positive relationship, and the coefficient of determination (R2) of 0.954 indicates that the subject can explain 95.4% of the variation in the dependent variable, namely the Topic of Publication of UI Students’ Final Projects Related to Good Health and Well-being.

Table 10. Relationship between publication subjects and UI students’ final project publication topics related to good health and well-being.

VariableRR2p-Value
Subject0.9770.954<0.001

The regression equation model cannot be displayed in Table 10 because 2261 topic subjects were used as independent variables. The model was applied as a topic predictor, as shown in Figure 2. These predictors allow librarians to enter the subject of publication to find the SDG 3 target that is associated with the topic. For example, Figure 4 shows that a final project with the subject “abortion” was coded “1” for the SDG 3 target “maternal health”.

a7befdf3-0400-422b-b56f-311933bcf43b_figure4.gif

Figure 4. Predictors of UI students’ final project publication topics related to good health and well-being by subject.

Discussion

Research limitations

This study used secondary data from the UI Library collection, acquired through the LONTAR system. During data processing, information bias can occur, especially during the categorisation process based on the 13 SDG 3 targets. Meanwhile, of the 5476 documents that met the inclusion criteria, 2802 (51%) had missing or duplicated data or were in the form of final works of specialist and professional programs. The number of missing data points may have caused selection bias in this study.

Total and publication progress

In total, the final project publications (undergraduate theses, master’s theses, and dissertations) of UI students from 2011–2020 and related to good health and well-being accounted for 2674 titles or 1.8% of all undergraduate theses, master theses, and dissertations in the UI Library. Of the five faculties that belong to the health sciences cluster, the Faculty of Public Health (FKM), the Faculty of Medicine (FK), and the Faculty of Nursing (FIK) have published the most. This may be because the number of students in these three faculties (9% of the total UI students) exceeds the number of students in the Faculty of Dentistry (FKG) and the Faculty of Pharmacy (FF) (only 3% of the total UI students). In addition, the FK, FKM, and FIK have more study programs than the FKG and FF.

The publication year data shows that the number of publications significantly increased in 2019, to almost double that of the previous year, with the average growth rate per year reaching 29% (see Figure 5). This shows that research interest in good health and well-being as an SDG did not gain much traction until 2019. A similar, significant upward trend was reported in the Punnakitikashem and Hallinger (2019) study on sustainable health management, which showed that the number of publications almost doubled in 2013 compared to the previous year. These trends suggest that research on good health and well-being could be researched more and more frequently in the years to come.

a7befdf3-0400-422b-b56f-311933bcf43b_figure5.gif

Figure 5. Number of Publications by Year of Publication.

However, the number of final project publications produced in 2020 was less than that in 2019. This is due to librarians’ decreased productivity in processing the final project collection during the implementation of the work-from-home (WFH) system during the COVID-19 pandemic. One of the reasons for this decline in productivity was inadequate equipment and internet network access. This increased the number of final assignments by UI students published in 2020 that have not been processed. To overcome this and given the control of COVID-19 cases, the UI Library implemented a full work-from-office (WFO) system in 2022. In addition, the UI Library plans to recruit student staff (Wiradha) to assist with the processing of final project publications.

Most of the publications were theses. Meanwhile, dissertations only accounted for 3.5% (94 titles) of all publications. Dissertations were only included from about 52.6% of the estimated number of doctoral program graduates from the health sciences cluster in 2011–2020. Therefore, the UI Library needs to increase the acceptance of scientific works from doctoral programs. The UI library could work with the UI Directorate of Education (Dirpen) to form regulations that require students of all levels to upload their final assignments to the UI Library and disseminate this policy to all faculties at UI.

Total subject progress per year

The analysis results show that the 30 topics studied were dominated by those related to access to universal health services (nursing care, public health, national health insurance, hospital administration, medical care, and health insurance), non-communicable diseases (diabetes mellitus, obesity, blood pressure, and fatigue), infectious diseases (tuberculosis, malaria, and Escherichia coli), maternal and child health (breastfeeding, child development, anaemia, and nutrition), and health risk management (industrial safety, industrial hygiene, and occupational health and safety).

Access to universal health care was in the top five most-discussed topics every year from 2017 to 2020. This aligns with the findings that Ghanbari et al. (2021) reported that researchers’ interest in studying universal health service access has increased continuously from 2009 to 2019. In addition, Sweileh (2020) shows that universal health service access was the most frequently studied SDG 3 target from 2015–2019. Therefore, continuing to increase interest in researching this topic, especially in developing countries, will be useful to understand the challenges and obstacles inhibiting the achievement of universal health service access and the improvement of global health overall (Ghanbari et al., 2021).

Priority topic

Regarding SDG 3 targets, UI students most often studied Target 4, Non-Communicable Diseases and Mental Health. This aligns with the results of basic health research showing that the prevalence of non-communicable diseases, such as diabetes mellitus (1.5%) and heart disease (1.5%), in Indonesia is higher than the incidence of infectious diseases, such as pulmonary tuberculosis (0.42%) and hepatitis (0.39%). As far as mental health issue was concerned, the prevalence of severe mental health disorder was cited at 1.7% of Indonesian community (Hartini et al., 2018).

Meanwhile, topics that have not been widely researched include Target 6 (Traffic Accidents), Target 5 (Abuse of Narcotics and Alcohol), and Target 10 (Tobacco Control). This also conforms to Sweileh’s results (2020) showing that these topics, especially drug and alcohol abuse, were not studied much compared with other topics according to the listings in the Scopus database from 2015–2019. The stigma against narcotics users can make researching the topic challenging. Narcotics abuse can increase the risk of other health problems, such as HIV/AIDS and hepatitis (Sweileh, 2020). Librarians must be competent in educating users about alternative research and sampling methods for hard-to-reach communities. In addition, librarians need insight into appropriate secondary data sources for research related to SDG 3.

Publication topic cluster mapping

The word co-occurrence analysis using the VosViewer software identified the five words with the most links to other topics: “knowledge”, “teenager”, “hypertension”, “industrial safety”, and “attitude” (see Figure 6).

a7befdf3-0400-422b-b56f-311933bcf43b_figure6.gif

Figure 6. Relationships between “Knowledge”, “Attitude”, “Hypertension”, “Industrial Safety”, and “Teenager” and other topics.

The words “knowledge” and “attitude” indicate that publications related to SDG 3 mostly focus on promotive and preventative efforts. It has been proved that promotive efforts can support the enabling factor to increase self-determination and control among people regarding their health while prevention efforts focus on avoiding the increase of risk factors towards disease, therefore for early detection can be done in reducing the incident and damage related to people’s health (Helfer et al., 2020). Furthermore, the words associated with “knowledge” and “attitude” indicate that pregnant and lactating women, children, and adolescents are the most frequently studied populations. The health problems studied in the adolescent population have been quite diverse but are dominated by non-communicable diseases and mental health. The number of studies on non-communicable diseases is also indicated by the term “hypertension”, which is one of the words that is most frequently related to other topics. Hypertension is a risk factor for various non-communicable diseases, including diabetes mellitus. In addition to these topics, industrial safety is also widely studied. This topic is also related to health risk management and occupational safety and health. Its presence in this analysis indicates that, in addition to the populations of pregnant women, breastfeeding women, children, and adolescents, UI students study industry and the workplace broadly.

Factors related to the topic of publication

Publication year

The results of the multivariate analysis show a significant relationship between the year of publication and the topic chosen. Non-communicable diseases and mental health, drug and alcohol abuse, access to universal health services, hazardous chemicals and pollution, tobacco control (cigarettes), and drug and vaccine development have tended to be researched more frequently over the years, while the remaining topics (maternal health, infant and toddler health, infectious diseases, traffic accidents, access to reproductive health services, health personnel, and health risk management) have tended to be researched progressively less. Librarians can consider this information when selecting collection procurement activities. Collections related to topics that tend to be researched more frequently each year can be prioritised, adopting one of the benefits of bibliometrics: assistance with decision-making in developing collections (Grace et al., 2019).

Faculty

The results of the multivariate analysis showed a significant relationship between faculty and publication topic. Among topics related to SDG 3, FKM students generated more publications on related topics than other faculties, except for drug and vaccine development, which was mainly covered by FF students, and non-communicable diseases and mental health, abuse of narcotics and alcohol, and tobacco control (cigarettes), which were mainly covered by FIK students. These topics were also researched by FK and FKG students. However, students in those faculties also studied topics that were not directly related to SDG 3, such as anatomy, physiology, forensics, and dental and bone health.

Type of work

The results of the multivariate analysis showed a significant relationship between the type of work and the topic chosen. Several topics were identified as being studied more frequently by postgraduate students (S-2 and S-3) than undergraduate students (S-1), including narcotics and alcohol abuse, access to reproductive health services, the development of drugs and vaccines, maternal health, infant and toddler health, non-communicable diseases and mental health, access to universal health services, tobacco control (cigarettes), and health personnel (HR). Other topics (infectious diseases, traffic accidents, hazardous chemicals and pollution, and health risk management) have been mainly studied by undergraduate students. One of the UI Library’s services to which the results of this analysis can be applied is the Lecturer and Postgraduate Special Reading Room Service. In this service, one librarian can consult with a user on their literature search. In addition, librarians can use the results of this analysis to provide information to meet users’ needs, especially those in postgraduate programs.

Subject

The results of the multivariate analysis show a significant relationship between the subject and the topic chosen. In addition, using the linear regression analysis that examined the relationship between the subject and the topic of publication, a linear regression model could be made to predict the topic of publication based on the subject. This offers another of the benefits of bibliometrics, namely that, according to Zipf’s Law, the analysis of the occurrence of words in documents can contribute to identifying index makers (Latief, 2014). The US National Library of Medicine (NLM) has implemented word occurrence analysis to aid in indexing. The NLM uses an algorithm with a text ranking approach to implement automatic medical subject heading (MeSH) indexing.

Conclusions

The development of the publication of UI students’ final assignments for 2011–2020 related to good health and well-being as a Sustainable Development Goal shows that SDG 3 has attracted significant research interest since 2019. Naturally, non-communicable diseases and mental health have been the most frequently studied topics. However, over time, other topics have begun to interest UI students, particularly access to universal health services.

The publication cluster mapping shows that UI student research related to SDG 3 has mostly focused on the promotive and preventative aspects of health problems. The most frequently studied subjects have been pregnant and breastfeeding women, children, adolescents, and industry or workplaces.

However, many topics related to SDG 3 have not yet been widely studied by UI students, including traffic accidents, the abuse of narcotics and alcohol, and tobacco control. Therefore, by utilising data from the bibliometric analysis of the main research themes in each faculty, libraries can formulate collection promotion strategies related to SDG 3 topics and identify the collection topics to prioritise. The creation of a publication topic prediction model can also inspire librarians to develop a system that supports automatic subject indexing.

Based on these results, the researcher offers the following suggestions. First, UI libraries need to coordinate with related units at the UI (the Directorate of Education and the Directorate of Information Systems and Technology) to create systems and policies that require students at all levels to upload their final assignment publications to the UI Library, especially students in doctoral programs and from faculties whose collection rate remains low. Second, UI Library collection metadata can be studied via bibliometric analysis to support collection development activities and library reference services. Therefore, librarians’ subject indexing activities must be accurate. After the subject indexing process, validation must also be performed to ensure data accuracy.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 03 Jan 2024
Comment
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
Views Downloads
F1000Research - -
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
- -
Citations
CITE
how to cite this article
Garnita D, Rahmi R, Joho H and Kadir A. From classroom to global goals: A bibliometric analysis of Universitas Indonesia’s student projects addressing Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 3 [version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2024, 13:7 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.141858.1)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?
Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Version 1
VERSION 1
PUBLISHED 03 Jan 2024
Views
3
Cite
Reviewer Report 27 Dec 2024
Jian Dai, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou, China 
Approved
VIEWS 3
This paper performs a bibliometric analysis of Universitas Indonesia's student projects addressing SDG 3. The study is valuable, but there are still some issues that need improvement.

1. The Background section needs to be reorganized. The authors should ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Dai J. Reviewer Report For: From classroom to global goals: A bibliometric analysis of Universitas Indonesia’s student projects addressing Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 3 [version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2024, 13:7 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.155342.r349720)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
Views
7
Cite
Reviewer Report 12 Jun 2024
Carlos Vílchez-Román, Carlos Vílchez-Román, Centro de Altos Estudios Nacionales (CAEN), Lima, Peru 
Approved with Reservations
VIEWS 7
Your Report

Please provide a full report, expanding on your answers to the questions above. In particular, if you answered “no” or “partly” to any of the questions, please give constructive and specific details as to how ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Vílchez-Román C. Reviewer Report For: From classroom to global goals: A bibliometric analysis of Universitas Indonesia’s student projects addressing Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 3 [version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2024, 13:7 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.155342.r262171)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 03 Jan 2024
Comment
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.