Insight into the Characteristics of Research Published in Complementary, Alternative, and Integrative Medicine Journals: A Bibliometric Analysis

Background: Complementary, alternative and integrative medicine (CAIM) can be described as diverse medical and healthcare interventions, practices, products, or disciplines that are not considered as part of conventional medicine. Inherent in its definition, CAIMs are comprised of a wide variety of therapies with highly variable safety and effectiveness evidence profiles. Despite this, the use of many CAIMs is highly prevalent among patients globally. The present study consists of a bibliometric analysis of CAIM journals. Methods: : A single search of all International Standard Serial Number (ISSNs) of all journals categorized as “complementary and alternative medicine” (code 2707) based on the All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) was run on Scopus on April 17, 2021. All publication types were included; no further search limits were applied. The following bibliometric data were collected: number of publications (in total and per year), authors and journals; open access status; journals publishing the highest volume of literature and their impact factors; language, countries, institutional affiliations, and funding sponsors of publications; most productive authors; and highest-cited publications. Trends associated with this subset of publications were identified and presented. Bibliometric networks were constructed and visualized using the software tool VOSviewer. Results: : A total of 172466 publications (42331 open access), were published by 219680 authors in 143 journals from 1938 to 2021. Since the 1940s, an upward trend with respect to the volume of publications can be observed, with a steep increase observed between the mid-2000s and mid-2010s. The journal that published the largest number of publications was the Journal of Natural Products (n=15144). The most productive countries included China (n=45860), the United States (n=29523), and Germany (n=10120); a number of the most common intuitional affiliations and funding sponsors also originated from these three countries. Conclusions: : The number of publications collectively published in CAIM journals follows an upward trend. Given a high prevalence of CAIM use among patients, increased acceptance of CAIM among conventional healthcare providers, and growing interest in the research of CAIM, future work should continue to investigate and track changes in the publication characteristics of the emerging research on this topic.