Bibliometric Network Analysis Of Studies Conducted in the Field of Factitious Disorder

Öz

Objective: Factitious disorder is a mental illness in which the patient consciously pretends to have a disorder. It is a disease that is difficult to diagnose, follow up and conduct scientific studies on because the patient is not inclined to cooperate and can appear in different disease manifestations related to different medical branches. Therefore, there is still a need for new studies in epidemiology, etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of the factitious disorder. This study aims to review the past and future trends of factitious disorder research by using bibliometric methods and to provide references to the studies conducted in this field. Material and Methods: Studies related to factitious disorder were compiled from the Web of Science core collection, and bibliometric analysis was performed on the authors, institutions, countries, publishing journals, citations, and keywords of these studies in the VOSviewer program. Results: Out of a total of 1573 studies, 676 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. A strong cooperation network between these institutions, where most of the studies in the field of factitious disorders are conducted in the USA (n: 259) and England (n: 87). The University of Alabama, Harvard University, The University of California are the most influential institutions in the field. It was determined that Mark D. Feldman (n: 28) and Roy Meadow (n: 15) were the authors who conducted the most studies. It has been shown that the studies with the highest annual average number of citations in the literature consist of case series and reviews. There need to be more effective and sufficient analytical studies. Conclusion: In this study, it has been shown that there is a strong cooperation network between countries, institutions, and authors in the field of factitious disorder. The determination that the most influential studies conducted consisted of reviews of case reports in the literature suggested that effective and analytical studies are needed. Recently selected keywords pointed out that the epidemiology, prevalence, forensic and ethical aspects of the disorder, factitious disorder by internet, and multidisciplinary approaches to children affected by factitious disorder by proxy are current study topics.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Factitious Disorder
• Factitious Disorder by Proxy
• Munchausen Syndrome
• Bibliometric Network Analysis
• VOSviewer

Yapay Bozukluk Alanında Yürütülen Çalışmaların Bibliyometrik Ağ Analizi

Öz

Amaç: Yapma bozukluk, hastanın bilinçli olarak hastalık rolü yaptığı bir ruhsal hastalıktır. Hastanın işbirliğine yatkın olmaması, farklı branşları ilgilendiren farklı hastalık görünümlerinde karşımıza çıkabilmesi nedeniyle tanı konması, takip edilmesi ve bilimsel çalışma yürütülmesi güç bir hastalıktır. Halen yapma bozukluğun epidemiyolojisi, etiyolojisi, tanı ve tedavisi alanlarında yeni çalışmalara ihtiyaç duyulmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, bibliyometrik yöntemler kullanılarak yapma bozukluk araştırma alanının geçmişini gözden geçirmek ve gelecekteki eğilimini anlamak ve bu alanda yürütülecek çalışmalara referans sağlamak amaçlanmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Web of Science çekirdek koleksiyonundan yapma bozukluk ile ilişkili çalışmalar derlenerek, bu çalışmaların yazarları, kurumları, ülkeleri, yayınlayan dergileri, alıntıları ve anahtar kelimeleri hakkında VOSviewer programında bibliyometrik analiz yapılmıştır. Bulgular: Toplam 1573 çalışmadan, çalışmaya dahil edilme kriterlerini karşılayan 676 çalışma analize alındı. Yapma bozukluk alanında yapılan çalışmaların büyük kısmının Amerika (n: 259) ve İngiltere’de (n: 87) yürütüldüğü, Alabama Üniversitesi, Harvard Üniversitesi, California San Francisco Üniversitesi’nin alandaki en etkili kurumlar olduğu, bu kurumlar arasında güçlü bir iş birliği ağı olduğu, Mark D. Feldman (n: 28) ve Roy Meadow’un (n: 15) en çok çalışma yürüten yazarlar olduğu saptanmıştır. Literatürde yıllık ortalama atıf sayısı en yüksek olan çalışmaların, vaka serileri ve derlemelerden oluştuğu, etkili ve yeterli analitik çalışmanın bulunmadığı gösterilmiştir. Sonuç: Bu çalışmada, yapma bozukluk alanında ülkeler, kurumlar ve yazarlar arasında güçlü bir işbirliği ağı olduğu gösterilmiştir. Yürütülen en etkili çalışmaların literatürdeki vaka sunumlarının derlemelerinden oluştuğunun belirlenmesi, etkili ve analitik çalışmalara ihtiyaç olduğunu düşündürmüştür. Son dönemde seçilen anahtar kelimeler, hastalığın epidemiyolojisi, yaygınlığı, adli ve etik yönleri, internet üzerinden yapma bozukluğunun ve bakım verenin yapma bozukluğundan etkilenen çocuklara yönelik multidipliner yaklaşımların güncel çalışma konuları olduğunu işaret etmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yapma Bozukluk
• Bakım Verenin Yapma Bozukluğu
• Munchausen Sendromu
• Bibliyometrik Ağ Analizi
• VOSviewer

Kaynakça

1. 1. Association AP. Somatic Symptom and Related Disorders. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM-5). Fifth edition ed. Arlington2013. p. 324-7.
2. 2. Yates GP, Feldman MD. Factitious disorder: a systematic review of 455 cases in the professional literature. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2016;41:20-8.
3. 3. Sadock BJ, Sadock AS, Ruiz P. Yapay Bozukluk. Kaplan & Sadock Psikiyatri Davranış Bilimleri/Klinik Psikiyatri. 11 ed: Wolters Kluwer; 2015. p. 489-95.
4. 4. Catalina ML, Gomez Macias V, de Cos A. Prevalence of factitious disorder with psychological symptoms in hospitalized patients. Actas Esp Psiquiatr. 2008;36(6):345-9.
5. 5. Wallach J. Laboratory diagnosis of factitious disorders. Arch Intern Med. 1994;154(15):1690-6.
6. 6. Merten T, Merckelbach H. Factitious disorder and malingering. In: Geddes JR, Andreasen NC, Goodwin GM, editors. New Oxford Textbook of Psychiatry. Third Edition ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2020.
7. 7. Quinn DK, Wang D, Powsner S, Eisendrath SJ. Factitious Disorder. In: Sadock BJ, Sadock AS, Ruiz P, editors. Kaplan & Sadock's Comprehensive Textbook Of Psychiatry. 10 ed: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2017.
8. 8. Chafetz MD, Bauer RM, Haley PS. The other face of illness-deception: Diagnostic criteria for factitious disorder with proposed standards for clinical practice and research. Clin Neuropsychol. 2020;34(3):454-76.

9. 9. Krahn LE, Bostwick JM, Stonnington CM. Looking toward DSM-V: should factitious disorder become a subtype of somatoform disorder? Psychosomatics. 2008;49(4):277-82.
10. 10. Nicola De B. Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis: From the Science Citation Index to Cybermetrics.: Scarecrow Press; 2009.
11. 11. Ercan S, Yazkan R, Kolcu G, Başer Kolcu Mİ, Gülle K, Koşar A. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi’nin Son 10 Yılının Bibliyometrik Analizi. SDÜ Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi. 2019;26(2):123 - 9.
12. 12. Gökmenoğlu M, Yavuz İS. Kamu Harcamaları ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisine Yönelik Çalışmaların Bibliyometrik Ağ Analizi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. 2022(52) :231 - 52.
13. 13. Wang X, Liu H, Li W, Xiao H. Bibliometric analysis of functional dyspepsia research trends over the past 20 years. Front Public Health. 2022;10:1019110.
14. 14. Yates G, Bass C. The perpetrators of medical child abuse (Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy) - A systematic review of 796 cases. Child Abuse Negl. 2017;72:45-53.
15. 15. van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics. 2010;84(2):523-38.
16. 16. van Eck NJ, Waltman L. VOSviewer Manual2022.
17. 17. Rosenberg DA. Web of deceit: a literature review of Munchausen syndrome by proxy. Child Abuse Negl. 1987;11(4):547-63.
18. 18. Meadow R. Munchausen syndrome by proxy. Arch Dis Child. 1982;57(2):92-8.
19. 19. Southall DP, Plunkett MC, Banks MW, Falkov AF, Samuels MP. Covert video recordings of life-threatening child abuse: lessons for child protection. Pediatrics. 1997;100(5):735-60.
20. 20. McClure RJ, Davis PM, Meadow SR, Sibert JR. Epidemiology of Munchausen syndrome by proxy, non-accidental poisoning, and non-accidental suffocation. Arch Dis Child. 1996;75(1):57-61.
21. 21. Meadow R. Management of Munchausen syndrome by proxy. Arch Dis Child. 1985;60(4):385-93.
22. 22. Rosen CL, Frost JD, Bricker T, Tamow JD, Gillette PC, Dunlavy S. Two Siblings with Recurrent Cardiorespiratory Arrest: Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy or Child Abuse? Pediatrics 1983;71(5):715–20.
23. 23. Solomon S, Lipton RB. Headaches and face pains as a manifestation of Munchausen syndrome. Headache. 1999;39(1):45-50.
24. 24. Sheridan MS. The deceit continues: an updated literature review of Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy. Child Abuse Negl. 2003;27(4):431-51.
25. 25. McGuire TL, Feldman KW. Psychologic morbidity of children subjected to Munchausen syndrome by proxy. Pediatrics. 1989;83(2):289-92.
26. 26. Warner JO, Hathaway MJ. Allergic form of Meadow's syndrome (Munchausen by proxy). Arch Dis Child. 1984;59(2):151-6.
27. 27. Kanaan R, Armstrong D, Barnes P, Wessely S. In the psychiatrist's chair: how neurologists understand conversion disorder. Brain. 2009;132(Pt 10):2889-96.
28. 28. Flaherty EG, Macmillan HL, Committee On Child A, Neglect. Caregiver-fabricated illness in a child: a manifestation of child maltreatment. Pediatrics. 2013;132(3):590-7.
29. 29. Berglund B, Anne-Cathrine M, Randers I. Dignity not fully upheld when seeking health care: experiences expressed by individuals suffering from Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Disabil Rehabil. 2010;32(1):1-7.
30. 30. Wang P, Tian D. Bibliometric analysis of global scientific research on COVID-19. J Biosaf Biosecur. 2021;3(1):4-9.
31. 31. Feldman MD, Feldman JM. Tangled in the web: countertransference in the therapy of factitious disorders. Int J Psychiatry Med. 1995;25(4):389-99.
32. 32. Bass C, Halligan P. Factitious disorders and malingering: challenges for clinical assessment and management. Lancet. 2014;383(9926):1422-32.
33. 33. Kozlowska K. Abnormal illness behaviours: a developmental perspective. Lancet. 2014;383(9926):1368-9.
34. 34. Feldman MD. Munchausen by Internet: detecting factitious illness and crisis on the Internet. South Med J. 2000;93(7):669-72.
35. 35. Savino AC, Fordtran JS. Factitious disease: clinical lessons from case studies at Baylor University Medical Center. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent). 2006;19(3):195-208.
36. 36. McCullumsmith CB, Ford CV. Simulated illness: the factitious disorders and malingering. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2011;34(3):621-41.
37. 37. Tozzo P, Picozzi M, Caenazzo L. Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy: balancing ethical and clinical challenges for healthcare professionals Ethical consideration in factitious disorders. Clin Ter. 2018;169(3):e129-e34.
38. 38. Ali-Panzarella AZ, Bryant TJ, Marcovitch H, Lewis JD. Medical Child Abuse (Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy): Multidisciplinary Approach from a Pediatric Gastroenterology Perspective. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2017;19(4):14.
39. 39. Vega S, Nienow SM, Huang MZ, Stover LB. Medical Child Welfare Task Force: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Identifying Medical Child Abuse. Pediatrics. 2023.