Scientometrics· 2026Q1
Moving towards decolonizing health professions education research: an analysis of global network patterns and equity implications
- 0citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
Social network analysis of global health professions education research (2015-2024) shows a hierarchical, centralized network despite increased global participation, indicating persistent structural inequity and potential epistemic colonization.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Global health professions education research network expanded globally between 2015-2024, with more countries participating.
- Network structure remained hierarchical, with declining small-worldness indicating power concentration.
- Centrality metrics showed dominant players remained consistent, suggesting a lack of power diffusion.
- Despite broader participation, power became more centralized, indicating persistent structural inequity.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Abstract Colonialism has left a lasting remnant in global academic community, with research contributions and authorship historically concentrated among high-income countries. This imbalance has made decolonization in research a global agenda aimed at rebalancing power relations across the community. Nevertheless, traditional bibliometric tools remain unable to capture such underlying power dynamics. This study proposes leveraging social network analysis (SNA) to examine community architecture and promote inclusivity in health professions education (HPE) research. We analyzed peer-reviewed articles published between 2015 and 2024 in leading HPE journals, extracting country-level co-authorship data from Scopus. SNA metrics, particularly small world coefficient and centrality, were used to assess collaboration structures, integration patterns, and power dynamics, capturing how power is distributed across the network. The analysis revealed an expanding–centralized pattern: although the research community has expanded globally, with more countries contributing, the overall network structure has remained hierarchical. The network’s small-worldness declined, indicating growing concentration of power within the network core, while stable centrality showed that dominant players have remained consistent throughout the decade. Despite an increasing number of nodes suggesting broader participation, power became increasingly centralized rather than distributed toward the periphery, suggesting the global network remains structurally inequitable and epistemic colonization may still persist. Systemic reforms in research infrastructure, nationally and globally, and in journal policies are needed to enable greater inclusivity. SNA offers critical insight into the structural imbalances that must be monitored to guide process toward achieving an equitable global research ecosystem.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Scientometrics, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Statistics, Probability and UncertaintyDecision Sciences