A PubMed-Based Exploration of the Course of Yoga Research from 1948 to 2020

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dipak Chetry ◽  
Shirley Telles ◽  
Acharya Balkrishna
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Publishing Research ◽  
The United States ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Health Conditions ◽  
Future Research ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Meta Analyses

Yoga research citations from 1948 to 2020 in PubMed were filtered and sorted in 10-year intervals to explore the occurrence and time frame of change in (1) the focus of research; (2) the number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews (SRs), and meta-analyses (MAs); (3) health conditions researched for yoga as therapy; (4) journals with yoga research; and (5) the research on yoga from different countries. Publications on yoga between 1948 and 1970 (1.25%) focused on exceptional abilities of experienced yoga practitioners, apparently related to the spiritual goal of yoga; from 1971 to 2000 (6.87%), the focus was on yoga in health and therapy; and from 2001 to 2020 (91.88%), research publications on yoga increased and continued to focus on health and therapy, with fewer RCTs relative to the SRs and MAs on yoga in PubMed. Publications on yoga reported the following health conditions most often: from 1981 to 1990, (1) asthma, (2) stress, and (3) diabetes; from 1991 to 2000, (1) stress followed by (2) asthma, anxiety, and pain (all three with equal percentages); from 2001 to 2010, (1) depression, (2) stress, and (3) anxiety; and from 2011 to 2020, (1) stress, (2) depression, and (3) pain. The journals publishing research on yoga in PubMed have changed between 1971 and 2020 as follows: highly clinically relevant, broad-interest medical journals (1971 to 1990); journals relevant to mind-body interventions (1991 to 2000); and specialized journals for complementary and alternative medicine, particular branches of medicine, or research study designs (2001 to 2020). The highest yoga research output from 1971 to 1980 came from the United Kingdom (RCTs); from 1981 to 1990 the most research came from the United States (RCTs); from 1991 to 2000 the most research came from India (RCTs) and the United Kingdom (SRs); from 2001 to 2010 the most research came from the United States (RCTs, SRs) and the United Kingdom (MAs); and from 2011 to 2020 the most research came from the United States (RCTs, SRs, MAs). The trends in yoga research from this analysis reflect increased research related to yoga and health while suggesting areas for future research based on the strengths and gaps that have emerged.

scholarly journals Bisexual Lives and Aging in Context: A Cross-National Comparison of the United Kingdom and the United States

2019 ◽  
Vol 89 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Jen ◽  
Rebecca L. Jones
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Life Course ◽  
Later Life ◽  
The United States ◽  
Life Course Perspective ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Racial Relations ◽  
Aids Epidemic ◽  
The United Kingdom

Research on bisexual histories and identities in later life is limited and reflects only single-nation studies. This article compares findings from two independently conducted studies of bisexual aging, in the United Kingdom and the United States, using a discourse analytic and life course perspective. The goals were to compare how participants narrated and made sense of their bisexual experiences in later life and to examine ways in which historical and cultural contexts shaped their accounts. Findings indicate that similar histories around lesbian separatism and the HIV/AIDS epidemic enabled shared discursive resources, while differing ethnic and racial relations enabled distinctive discursive possibilities. In both studies intersectional experiences, particularly including being a person of color and having a transgender history, profoundly affected individual narratives. Future research will benefit from creative conceptualizations of bisexuality, applying the life course perspective in research and practice, and supporting the diverse and resilient ways bisexual older adults use language.

scholarly journals Research output on primary care in Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States: bibliometric analysis

BMJ ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 342 (mar08 2) ◽  
pp. d1028-d1028 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Glanville ◽  
T. Kendrick ◽  
R. McNally ◽  
J. Campbell ◽  
F. R. Hobbs
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Research Output ◽  
The United States ◽  
The United Kingdom

scholarly journals Research Output and International Cooperation Among Countries During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Scientometric Analysis

10.2196/24514 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (12) ◽  
pp. e24514
Author(s):  
Nadja Grammes ◽  
Dominic Millenaar ◽  
Tobias Fehlmann ◽  
Fabian Kern ◽  
Michael Böhm ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Web Application ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Large Data ◽  
The United States ◽  
Scientific Output ◽  
Scientometric Analysis ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Collaborative Efforts

Background The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, has instigated immediate and massive worldwide research efforts. Rapid publication of research data may be desirable but also carries the risk of quality loss. Objective This analysis aimed to correlate the severity of the COVID-19 outbreak with its related scientific output per country. Methods All articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic were retrieved from Web of Science and analyzed using the web application SciPE (science performance evaluation), allowing for large data scientometric analyses of the global geographical distribution of scientific output. Results A total of 7185 publications, including 2592 articles, 2091 editorial materials, 2528 early access papers, 1479 letters, 633 reviews, and other contributions were extracted. The top 3 countries involved in COVID-19 research were the United States, China, and Italy. The confirmed COVID-19 cases or deaths per region correlated with scientific research output. The United States was most active in terms of collaborative efforts, sharing a significant amount of manuscript authorships with the United Kingdom, China, and Italy. The United States was China’s most frequent collaborative partner, followed by the United Kingdom. Conclusions The COVID-19 research landscape is rapidly developing and is driven by countries with a generally strong prepandemic research output but is also significantly affected by countries with a high prevalence of COVID-19 cases. Our findings indicate that the United States is leading international collaborative efforts.

Goodwill accounting standards in the United Kingdom, the United States, France, and Japan

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 314-337 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clémence Garcia ◽  
Yuko Katsuo ◽  
Carien van Mourik
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
The United States ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Current Debate ◽  
Accounting Systems ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Stakeholder Model ◽  
History Of ◽  
Phases Of Development

In this article, we revisit the history of accounting for goodwill in the United Kingdom, the United States, France, and Japan following the conclusions and predictions of Ding, Richard and Stolowy (2008). We aim at verifying whether the four phases of development of the accounting for goodwill between 1880 and 2005 are actually determined by the global change from a stakeholder model of corporate governance to a shareholder model. An extended time frame of analysis (until 2016) is considered in this study, which includes Japan among the country-specific accounting systems investigated. Our findings do not support Ding et al.’s predictions for Japan and demonstrate a disagreement between those countries which consider goodwill as a depleting asset and those which consider goodwill as a permanent asset. This observation might explain better the current debate concerning international harmonization on goodwill.

scholarly journals Developing CAM Research Capacity for Complementary Medicine

2006 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 283-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Lewith ◽  
Marja Verhoef ◽  
Mary Koithan ◽  
Suzanna M. Zick
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Alternative Medicine ◽  
Research Policy ◽  
Research Capacity ◽  
The United States ◽  
Research Strategy ◽  
Future Research ◽  
The United Kingdom

This article describes initiatives that have been central to the development of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) research capacity in the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States over the last decade. While education and service delivery are essential parts of the development of CAM, this article will focus solely on the development of research strategy. The development of CAM research has been championed by both patients and politicians, primarily so that we may better understand the popularity and apparent effectiveness of these therapies and support integration of safe and effective CAM in health care. We hope that the perspective provided by this article will inform future research policy.

scholarly journals Research Output and International Cooperation Among Countries During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Scientometric Analysis (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadja Grammes ◽  
Dominic Millenaar ◽  
Tobias Fehlmann ◽  
Fabian Kern ◽  
Michael Böhm ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Web Application ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Large Data ◽  
The United States ◽  
Scientific Output ◽  
Scientometric Analysis ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Collaborative Efforts

BACKGROUND The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, has instigated immediate and massive worldwide research efforts. Rapid publication of research data may be desirable but also carries the risk of quality loss. OBJECTIVE This analysis aimed to correlate the severity of the COVID-19 outbreak with its related scientific output per country. METHODS All articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic were retrieved from Web of Science and analyzed using the web application SciPE (science performance evaluation), allowing for large data scientometric analyses of the global geographical distribution of scientific output. RESULTS A total of 7185 publications, including 2592 articles, 2091 editorial materials, 2528 early access papers, 1479 letters, 633 reviews, and other contributions were extracted. The top 3 countries involved in COVID-19 research were the United States, China, and Italy. The confirmed COVID-19 cases or deaths per region correlated with scientific research output. The United States was most active in terms of collaborative efforts, sharing a significant amount of manuscript authorships with the United Kingdom, China, and Italy. The United States was China’s most frequent collaborative partner, followed by the United Kingdom. CONCLUSIONS The COVID-19 research landscape is rapidly developing and is driven by countries with a generally strong prepandemic research output but is also significantly affected by countries with a high prevalence of COVID-19 cases. Our findings indicate that the United States is leading international collaborative efforts. CLINICALTRIAL

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document