Hikikomori: A perspective from bibliometric analysis

Hong Cai, Sha Sha, Qinge Zhang, Tong Leong Si, Yu Fei Liu, Wan Ying Zheng, Zhaohui Su, Teris Cheung, Gabor S. Ungvari, Alan R. Teo, Takahiro A. Kato, Chee H. Ng, Yu Tao Xiang

Research output: Journal article publicationJournal articleAcademic researchpeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aims: Hikikomori is a common phenomenon reported in Japan and many other countries. However, the broad trends of the research publications on hikikomori are unclear. Therefore, this study examined the patterns of research on hikikomori using bibliometric analysis. Methods: Relevant publications were searched in Web of Science. Bibliometric analyses were performed with CiteSpace, R and VOSviewer. Results: In total, 297 publications on hikikomori met the eligibility criteria. The International Journal of Social Psychiatry (IF = 10.461) published the most papers (K = 17, or 5.7%) on hikikomori. Takahiro A. Kato from Kyushu University (41; 13.8%; H-index = 18) was the most influential author, while Takahiro A. Kato (total link strength [TLS]: 235), Alan R. Teo (TLS: 157), and Masaru Tateno (TLS: 153) separately had the strongest research collaboration with other researchers. Of all countries that published on hikikomori, Japan had the highest number of publications (K = 91). The keywords “United States” and “psychiatric diagnosis” received the most attention between 2013 and 2015, whereas “health” and “autism spectrum disorder” received the most attention in 2021 and 2022. Conclusions: Peer-reviewed research publications on hikikomori are growing rapidly and the research trends in this field are also changing.

Original languageEnglish
JournalPsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 2023

Keywords

  • bibliometric analysis
  • hikikomori
  • Japan

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Neuroscience
  • Neurology
  • Clinical Neurology
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Hikikomori: A perspective from bibliometric analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this