Visualizing Patterns and Trends of 25 Years of Published Health Literacy Research

With an increase in the number of disciplines contributing to health literacy scholarship, we sought to explore the nature of interdisciplinary research in the field.  This study sought to describe disciplines that contribute to health literacy research and to quantify how disciplines draw from and contribute to an interdisciplinary evidence base, as measured by citation networks.  We conducted a literature search for health literacy articles published between 1991 and 2015 in four bibliographic databases, producing 6,229 unique bibliographic records. We employed a scientometric tool (CiteSpace  to quantify patterns in published health literacy research, including a visual path from cited discipline domains to citing discipline domains.  The number of health literacy publications increased each year between 1991 and 2015. Two spikes, in 2008 and 2013, correspond to the introduction of additional subject categories, including information science and communication. Two journals have been cited more than 2,000 times—the Journal of General Internal Medicine (n = 2,432) and Patient Education and Counseling (n = 2,252). The most recently cited journal added to the top 10 list of cited journals is the Journal of Health Communication (n = 989). Three main citation paths exist in the health literacy data set. Articles from the domain “medicine, medical, clinical” heavily cite from one domain (health, nursing, medicine), whereas articles from the domain “psychology, education, health” cite from two separate domains (health, nursing, medicine and psychology, education, social).  Recent spikes in the number of published health literacy articles have been spurred by a greater diversity of disciplines contributing to the evidence base. However, despite the diversity of disciplines, citation paths indicate the presence of a few, self-contained disciplines contributing to most of the literature, suggesting a lack of interdisciplinary research. To address complex and evolving challenges in the health literacy field, interdisciplinary team science, that is, integrating science from across multiple disciplines, should continue to grow. [Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2017;1(4):e182-e191.]  The addition of diverse disciplines conducting health literacy scholarship has spurred recent spikes in the number of publications. However, citation paths suggest that interdisciplinary research can be strengthened. Findings directly align with the increasing emphasis on team science, and support opportunities and resources that incentivize interdisciplinary health literacy research. The study of health literacy has significantly expanded over the past decade. It represents a dynamic area of inquiry that extends to multiple disciplines. Health literacy emerged as a derivative of literacy and early definitions focused on the ability to read and understand medical instructions and health care information (Parker, Baker, Williams, & Nurss, 1995; Williams et al., 1995). This early work led to a body of research demonstrating that people with low health literacy generally had poorer health outcomes, including lower levels of screening and medication adherence rates (Baker,