Bibliometric analysis of family medicine and primary care related specialty thesis prepared outside of family medicine departments and clinics

Objective: This study aims to conduct a bibliometric analysis of theses related to Family Medicine and Primary Health Care Services that were prepared outside Family Medicine Departments and Clinics between the beginning of the database and December 15, 2024. Materials and Methods: In this descriptive study, a total of 220 publicly accessible theses available on the Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center website (https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/) up to December 15, 2024, were analyzed bibliometrically. In the first stage, data regarding the thesis author (gender, institution, faculty, etc.), the advisor (gender, branch, academic title, etc.), and the thesis itself (subject, research type, research method, etc.) were recorded. In the second stage, the publication status of each thesis was investigated through multiple databases — Google (www.google.com), Google Scholar (https://scholar.google.com), PubMed (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/), TR Index TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM (https://trdizin.gov.tr/), and Dergipark (https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/) — by searching the author's name, advisor's name, thesis title (in Turkish or English), or relevant keywords. For the published theses, journal indices, citation counts, and quartile (Q) classifications were recorded. Results: Among the thesis authors, 45% were from Faculties of Health Sciences, 26.8% from Faculties of Medicine, and 16.4% from Faculties of Social Sciences. Regarding the advisors, 42.7% held the title of Professor, 32.3% Associate Professor, and 24.1% Assistant Professor. Advisor specialization was most frequent in Public Health (28.2%), followed by Nursing (14.5%) and Health Management (9.1%). Of all theses, 86.4% were field studies, 97.7% were single-center, 92.3% used survey methods, 3.6% used laboratory methods, and none employed imaging techniques. Only 4.1% of theses received project funding. Most studies (93.2%) were descriptive/cross-sectional in design. The most frequent topics were Family Medicine (16.4%), Self-care (9.5%), Preventive Health Services (7.7%), and Health Management (5.9%). The rates of continuing academic career and working on the same research topic were both 18.6%. Overall, 26.8% of theses were published, of which 22.4% appeared in SCI/SCI-E indexed journals and 15.5% in ESCI journals. Among SCI/SCI-E indexed publications, 46% were classified as Q2, 23% as Q1, 23% as Q3, and 8% as Q4. In 86.2% of published articles, the thesis author was listed as the first author. The median difference between the thesis completion year and publication year was 2 years, the median impact factor of journals was 1.26, and the median citation count was 3. Variables significantly associated with publication status included advisor's field, project support, thesis topic, and 4 continuation of an academic career. The publication rates of theses supervised by Health Management specialists (55%), Public Health (30.6%), and Nursing/Midwifery (37.5%) were significantly higher than those in other fields (14.2%) (p<0.05). Theses focusing on Self-care (47.6%) and Family Medicine (36.1%) were published at significantly higher rates (p<0.05). Theses with project funding (4.1%) and authors pursuing academic careers (18.6%) also had significantly higher publication rates (p<0.05). Conclusion and Recommendations: The predominance of Public Health and Health Management among thesis advisors, and the 55% publication rate of Health Management theses, demonstrate that research in these areas can directly influence the health system. The most frequent topics — Family Medicine (36%), Self-care (21%), Preventive Health Services (17%), and Health Management (13%) — indicate that disciplines outside Family Medicine Clinics address the organizational, managerial, and workforce dimensions of primary health care, such as working conditions and professional burnout. This suggests that primary health care is approached not only from a medical perspective but also from social and managerial dimensions, reflecting a holistic understanding of the health system. Higher publication rates of Self-care (47.6%) and Family Medicine (36.1%) theses (p<0.05) indicate that these topics are particularly suitable for scientific production. Theses receiving project support (4.1%) and those authored by individuals continuing academic careers (18.6%) had significantly higher publication rates (p<0.05), demonstrating that both institutional support and academic continuity play a critical role in publication success. Overall, strengthening project funding and academic incentives, maintaining interdisciplinary collaboration, and emphasizing the social dimensions of primary health care are essential to enhance knowledge production and service quality within the health system.