Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 21, 2026

05:02
Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases
Published on: October 24, 2019
Mapping faculty development needs in medical education: a bibliometric analysis.
Afaf Sulaiman Alblooshi1, Farida Almarzooqi2, Saif Al-Shamsi2
1Department of Medical Education, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain/Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Frontiers in Medicine
|July 16, 2026
Summary
Faculty development needs assessment research in medical education has grown significantly, yet remains geographically concentrated and methodologically limited. Priority needs include teaching, assessment, and curriculum development, highlighting universal challenges and the need for targeted programming.
Area of Science:
- Medical Education Research
- Bibliometrics
- Faculty Development
Background:
- Faculty development is crucial for medical education quality.
- The scholarly landscape of faculty development needs assessment lacks systematic mapping.
- Understanding research trajectories, concentration, themes, and methods is essential.
Purpose of the Study:
- To bibliometrically analyze the intellectual structure of faculty development needs assessment research in medical education (2005-2025).
- To identify consistent faculty development priorities across diverse institutional contexts.
- To map growth, geographic concentration, thematic architecture, and methodological foundations.
Main Methods:
- Bibliometric analysis using Biblioshiny (Bibliometrix v5.1.0, R v4.4.1).
- Data sourced from Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed.
- Included publication trends, geographic distribution, citation patterns, keyword co-occurrence, thematic mapping, and collaboration networks, supplemented by narrative synthesis.
Main Results:
- Publication output increased eightfold (2005-2025), with accelerated growth post-2018.
- Research is concentrated in high-income countries, notably the US.
- Needs assessment, staff development, and curriculum were key themes; priorities included teaching skills, assessment, feedback, curriculum development, supervision, and scholarship.
- Methodology predominantly used cross-sectional surveys with limited evaluation beyond Kirkpatrick Level 1.
Conclusions:
- Faculty development needs assessment research shows substantial growth but is geographically concentrated and methodologically limited.
- Consistent priority needs indicate universal medical education challenges, necessitating targeted programming.
- Future research should employ longitudinal designs, expand global capacity, and measure authentic educational impact beyond self-report.