Sağlık Ekonomisinde Yeni Paradigmalar: Yükselen Araştırma Alanlarının Bibliyometrik İncelemesi

Öz

Bu çalışma, sağlık ekonomisi alanının bilimsel gelişimini bibliyometrik analiz yöntemiyle incelemektedir. Bu amaçla, 2021-2025 döneminde Web of Science veri tabanında indekslenen ve başlığında "health economics" terimi bulunan 308 akademik yayın, R tabanlı bibliometrix paketi ve VOSviewer yazılımı kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Betimsel analiz, bilimsel üretkenlik metrikleri ve içerik analizi teknikleri uygulanmıştır. Bulgular üç ana örüntü ortaya koymuştur. İlk olarak, sağlık ekonomisi araştırmaları özellikle 2022 yılında pandemi sonrası sağlık sistemlerinin ekonomik boyutlarına artan ilgi nedeniyle belirgin büyüme göstermiştir. İkinci olarak, ABD, İngiltere ve Çin araştırma çıktısında liderlik ederken, güçlü atıf etkisi gösteren bu ülkeler küresel olarak genişleyen bir araştırma ekosistemini işaret etmektedir. Üçüncü olarak, araştırmaların tematik odağı temel ekonomik değerlendirmelerden daha bütünsel sağlık sistemi yaklaşımlarına doğru kayma göstermektedir. Alanın entelektüel evrimini multidisipliner perspektiften haritalayan bu araştırma trendleri ve iş birliği ağlarını haritalayarak, temel ekonomik analizlerden stratejik sağlık politikası entegrasyonuna doğru bir kayma ortaya koymaktadır. Sonuç olarak, bu analiz sağlık ekonomisindeki teknolojik evrimi resmederek ve precision medicine ile global collaboration gibi öncü yaklaşımların artan önemini vurgulayarak literatüre yeni içgörüler sunmakta ve alanı güncel ve etkili bir araştırma sahası olarak teyit etmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sağlık Ekonomisi
• Bibliyometrik Analiz
• Ekonomik Değerlendirme
• Uluslararası Iş Birliği
• Covid-19

New Paradigms in Health Economics: Bibliometric Reviews of Emerging Research Areas

Öz

This study examines the scientific development of the field of health economics using bibliometric analysis. For this purpose, 308 academic publications indexed in the Web of Science database between 2021 and 2025, containing the term "health economics" in their titles, were analyzed using the R-based bibliometrix package and VOSviewer software. Descriptive analysis, scientific productivity metrics, and content analysis techniques were applied. The findings revealed three main patterns. First, health economics research showed significant growth, particularly in 2022, due to the increased interest in the economic dimensions of health systems after the pandemic. Second, the US, UK, and China led in research output, with these countries demonstrating strong citation impact, indicating an expanding global research ecosystem. Third, the thematic focus of research is shifting from basic economic evaluations to more holistic health system approaches. By mapping the field's intellectual evolution from a multidisciplinary perspective, this research maps trends and collaborative networks, revealing a shift from basic economic analysis to strategic health policy integration. Ultimately, by illustrating the technological evolution in health economics and highlighting the growing importance of pioneering approaches such as precision medicine and global collaboration, this analysis offers new insights into the literature and confirms the field as a current and influential field of research.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Health economics
• Bibliometric Analysis
• Economic Evaluation
• International Cooperation
• Covid-19

Kaynakça

1. Akindinova, N. V., Chernyavsky, A. V., & Chepel, A. A. (2024). Measuring the effectiveness of budget expenditures. Voprosy Ekonomiki, 4, 92–110. https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-4-92-110
2. Arhin, K., Oteng-Abayie, E. F., & Novignon, J. (2023). Assessing the efficiency of health systems in achieving the universal health coverage goal: Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. Health Economics Review, 13(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-023-00433-y
3. Barbu, L. (2023). Global trends in the scientific research of the health economics: A bibliometric analysis from 1975 to 2022. Health Economics Review, 13(31), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-023-00446-7
4. Burgdorf, C. E., Riley, W. T., Akbar, F., Zuehlke, A. D., Bibb, K., Eshleman, H. D., Shah, A., Belis, D., Spittel, M., & Fearon, P. (2024). Analysis of the health economics portfolio funded by the National Institutes of Health in response to published guidance. PLOS ONE, 19(2), e0284235. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284235
5. Dawkins, B., Shinkins, B., Ensor, T., Jayne, D., & Meads, D. (2024). Incorporating healthcare access and equity in economic evaluations: A scoping review of guidelines. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 40(1), e59. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462324000618
6. Dönmez, G., Tosunoğlu, B., & Cengiz, S. (2020). A bibliometric research on national and international journals on audit quality. The Journal of International Scientific Researches, 5, 78–86. https://doi.org/10.23834/isrjournal.839005
7. Husereau, D., Drummond, M., Augustovski, F., de Bekker-Grob, E., Briggs, A. H., Carswell, C., Caulley, L., Chaiyakunapruk, N., Greenberg, D., Loder, E., Mauskopf, J., Mullins, C. D., Petrou, S., Pwu, R.-F., Staniszewska, S., & CHEERS 2022 ISPOR Good Research Practices Task Force. (2022). Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) statement: Updated reporting guidance for health economic evaluations. Value in Health, 25(1), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2021.11.1351
8. Kose, I., Gokturk, M., & Kilic, K. (2015). An interactive machine-learning-based electronic fraud and abuse detection system in healthcare insurance. Applied Soft Computing, 36, 283–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2015.07.018

9. Koştı, G., Burmaoğlu, S., & Kıdak, L. B. (2021). Sağlık 4.0: Sanayide öngörülen gelişimin sağlık sektörüne yansımaları. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi, 24(3), Article 3.
10. Looi, J. C. L., Davis, J. M., Hensher, M., & Robson, S. J. (2023). Under- and postgraduate education in health economics for Australia’s medical practitioners: Time for change? Australian Economic Review, 56(3), 393–412. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8462.12520
11. Hiligsmann, M., Cooper, C., Arden, N., Boers, M., Branco, J. C., Brandi, M. L., Bruyère, O., Guillemin, F., Hochberg, M. C., Hunter, D. J., Kanis, J. A., Kvien, T. K., Laslop, A., Pelletier, J. P., Pinto, D., Reiter-Niesert, S., Rizzoli, R., Rovati, L. C., Severens, J. L., Silverman, S., Tsouderos, Y., Tugwell, P., & Reginster, J. Y. (2013). Health economics in the field of osteoarthritis: An expert's consensus paper from the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (ESCEO). Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism, 43(3), 303–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semarthrit.2013.07.003
12. Martin, J., & Cheng, D. (2013). Role of the anesthesiologist in the wider governance of healthcare and health economics. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal Canadien d’anesthésie, 60(9), 918–928. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-013-9994-7
13. Mistry, H., Oppong, R., & Frew, E. J. (2014). Health economics education (HEE) web site: A tool to enhance health economics teaching in the United Kingdom. The Journal of Economic Education, 45(1), 79. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2014.859972
14. Mitchell, P. M., & Kohlhammer, V. W. (2021). The cost-effectiveness of what in health and care? In J. Schildmann, C. Buch, & J. Zerth (Eds.), Defining the value of medical interventions: Normative and empirical challenges. W. Kohlhammer GmbH. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK572798/
15. Murphy, P., Walker, S., Putri, S., et al. (2026). What is the value of developing an HTA process? PharmacoEconomics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-026-01613-4
16. Okoroiwu, K. L., Okoroiwu, H. U., Ude, L. O., Ezuma, C. O., & Omeje, E. I. (2024). Global bibliometric analysis of cost effectiveness analysis in healthcare research from 2013 to 2023. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 22(1), 68. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12962-024-00576-7
17. Polat, Z. A., Saraçoğlu, A., & Duman, H. (2019). Harita Dergisi’nin bibliyometrik analizi. Harita Dergisi, 161, 46–56.
18. Porter, A., & Cunningham, S. (2005). Tech mining: Exploiting new technologies for competitive advantage. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471698466.index
19. Pranckutė, R. (2021). Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world. Publications, 9(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010012
20. Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics. Journal of Documentation, 25, 348–349.
21. Rudmik, L., & Drummond, M. (2013). Health economic evaluation: important principles and methodology. Laryngoscope, 123(6), 1341–1347. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.23943
22. Teerawattananon, Y., Wang, Y., KC, S. et al. Harnessing health economic evaluation for policy and practice. Commun Med 6, 234 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43856-026-01585-8
23. Ulrich, V. (2012). Entwicklung der Gesundheitsökonomie in Deutschland. Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz, 55(5), 604–613. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00103-012-1478-3
24. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2017). Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer. Scientometrics, 111(2), 1053–1070. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2300-7
25. Vieira, F. S. (2016). Reflexões sobre o papel das unidades de economia da saúde no âmbito de sistemas nacionais de saúde. Saúde e Sociedade, 25, 306–319. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-12902016154831
26. Waugh, N., & Mistry, H. (2019). A brief introduction to health economics. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 27(6), 1704–1707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-019-05372-y
27. Weinstein, M. C., & Stason, W. B. (1977). Foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis for health and medical practices. New England Journal of Medicine, 296(13), 716–721. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM197703312961304
28. World Health Organization. (2025). Global health expenditure database. Retrieved April 4, 2025, from http://apps.who.int/nha/database