Mapping of Global Aging and Poverty Research: A Scientometric and Visualization Approach

As the world’s population continues to age, the connection between aging poverty has emerged as an important area of research, attracting increasing attention from scholars, policymakers, and practitioners. Rapid demographic change around the world, especially in developing countries, has increased the vulnerability of older people, many of whom face economic hardship due to inadequate pension systems, rising health care costs, and diminishing family support networks. Understanding the complexities of poverty among older adults is crucial for developing effective interventions to improve the quality of life of older adults.^[1]

Aging and poverty are characterized by having an income below 50% of the national average disposable income, defined as the amount remaining after taxes and social transfers.^[2] This highlights the financial struggles individuals face when their income is well below the average standard of living.^[3] Academic research on global aging poverty has expanded significantly, reflecting the growing concern over its socio-economic implications.

As global demographic changes unfold, aging populations are becoming more susceptible to financial instability, insufficient healthcare access, poor housing conditions, and restricted social support.^[4] The increasing percentage of elderly individuals, a result of lower birth rates and longer life spans, poses considerable socio-economic challenges, especially in developing nations where support systems are frequently lacking.^[5] This demographic shift calls for immediate policy measures to establish sustainable welfare systems and ensure fair access to resources for senior citizens.^[6]

This study aims to conduct a comprehensive bibliometric and scientometric review of global aging poverty research. Using advanced visualization techniques, it examines publication trends, citation networks, and thematic developments, providing a structured overview of the field.^[7,8] Likewise, Aging and poverty are interconnected global issues that impact the well-being of older adults. As populations grow older, financial insecurity, limited healthcare, and inadequate housing increasingly affect quality of life, especially in low-income regions. Weak pension systems and insufficient social support further exacerbate these challenges. Dey et al., (2012) emphasized the need for robust social safety nets and comprehensive policies to promote healthy aging. Addressing these concerns is vital to ensure dignity and stability for aging populations worldwide.^[9]

The literature review in a research paper is crucial for providing an overview of existing studies on a topic and situating the current research within the broader academic context. This study presents the relevant literature on aging and poverty in chronological order. Cruz study aimed to map global research trends on financial literacy and health among older adults. Using a scientometric approach, 106 articles from the Web of Science and Scopus were analyzed via Biblioshiny and VOSviewer. The results revealed an increase in publications, especially post-2019, with U.S.-led research. The key themes included Alzheimer’s disease, dementia, decision-making, and financial vulnerability. The study identified research gaps in fraud and mental health, calling for targeted interdisciplinary strategies to empower aging populations.^[10]

This literature review examines the evolving landscape of aging research with a focus on global and regional trends. A study by Fajardo-Ortiz and Sipido (2024) mapped the growth and collaboration patterns in aging research from the Global South using bibliometric analysis (2007-2022) via VOSviewer and Bibliometrix. Countries like Brazil, India, and South Africa showed increasing contributions, with notable South-South and South-North collaborations. Thematic trends centered around policy, health equity, and demographic shifts.^[11] Another study by Palanbek Yavaş and Baysan (2024) explored global research on elderly suicide from 1951 to 2022 using Scopus data and scientometric tools. The USA led in scholarly output, particularly after 2000, with dominant themes such as mental health, depression, and aging.^[12] Complementing this, Zhang et al., (2024) analyzed healthy aging trends through Web of Science data using VOSviewer and CiteSpace, identifying core themes like active aging and dementia prevention, with the USA and China emerging as leading contributors post-2000.^[13]

This study aimed to explore the intellectual landscape and research trends of “Design Methods for the Elderly” using scientometric analysis. Data were extracted from Web of Science, Scopus, and CNKI databases and analyzed using CiteSpace. Key findings revealed a growing research focus post-2015, interdisciplinary collaboration, and dominant themes like user-centered design and aging technology.^[14,15] The study aimed to analyze publication trends, key contributors, and thematic evolution in poverty research for sustainable development from 1964 to 2022 using Scopus data. Employing scientometric techniques and tools like VOSviewer and Bibliometrix, it identified growth in output post-2000, with dominance by the USA and UK. Articles, especially on policy and SDGs, were most cited, revealing sustainability as a central theme.^[16] This study aims to analyze global scientific literature on Aging in Place using scientometric methods. Bibliographic data from Scopus was analyzed through tools like VOSviewer and Bibliometrix. Key findings reveal an upward trend in publications, dominance of high-income countries, and emerging themes such as smart homes and assistive technology. This study contributes to understanding global research directions and collaboration networks on aging in place.^[17]

This literature review uses bibliometric tools to explore the global research trends on aging and poverty. It highlights significant scholarly contributions and uncovers gaps that require further investigation. As the aging population increases, interdisciplinary approaches and evidence-based policymaking are vital for addressing socioeconomic challenges. Analyzing existing studies through a scientometric lens provides a strong foundation for future research and emphasizes the urgent need to support older adults’ well-being in an evolving global context.^[18] The literature highlights a strong correlation between aging and poverty, emphasizing financial insecurity, limited healthcare access and inadequate pension systems. Older adults, especially in low-resource settings, face heightened risks due to a lack of social support. Research underscores a vicious cycle: poor health reduces earning capacity, while poverty exacerbates health decline. This interdependence calls for integrated policy responses that address both economic and health vulnerabilities, particularly in developing nations such as India, to ensure dignified aging and an improved quality of life.^[19] This study aimed to assess global research output on poverty-related medical literature from 2005-2015. Using Scopus data and bibliometric techniques, it analyzed 1,214 documents. Findings show a steady increase in publications, led by the U.S. and the UK. Major themes included public health, HIV/AIDS, and child mortality. The study highlights disparities in global research contribution and calls for enhanced international collaboration, particularly from low-income countries where poverty-related health issues are most severe.^[20] Likewise, this study aims to analyze global research trends in energy poverty from 1999-2019. Using bibliometric techniques and tools like VOSviewer, Bibliometrix, and HistCite on 1,018 Web of Science articles, it maps external and internal research characteristics. The findings reveal increasing publication trends, leading countries (UK, USA), and emerging themes such as energy justice and evaluation methods. The study identifies four major research clusters and emphasizes interdisciplinary collaboration and future research on policy and vulnerable groups.^[21]

Generally, older adults with low incomes perceive that living in poverty restricts their ability to meet basic human needs and has a detrimental impact on their health.^[22] The relationship between aging and poverty has been the subject of significant research, with various studies highlighting the complex factors that contribute to the vulnerability of older adults. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), aging populations in both developed and developing countries face increasing economic insecurity due to inadequate pension systems, rising healthcare costs, and limited post-retirement employment opportunities. Furthermore, the WHO points out that many elderly individuals lack the financial resources needed to maintain a decent standard of living, particularly in regions where social safety nets are weak or non-existent.^[23]

The population of individuals aged 60 years and older is growing rapidly. In 2019, there were 1 billion people in this age group, a figure projected to rise to 1.4 billion by 2030 and 2.1 billion by 2050. This increase is happening at an unprecedented rate and is expected to accelerate in the coming decades, especially in developing countries.^[23,24]

Similar study from the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) focuses that many older adults, especially women, face higher poverty rates in old age due to lower lifetime earnings, caregiving responsibilities, and longer life expectancies, leading to reliance on insufficient pensions and social welfare. Additionally, studies by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) show that elderly individuals in high-income countries, particularly those without substantial retirement savings, are at risk of poverty due to rising living and healthcare costs.^[23] Likewise, the health-related consequences of poverty among older adults include higher prevalence of chronic diseases and financial insecurity due to limited access to health care. The authors emphasize the need for integrated health and financial support policies to address the comprehensive needs of an aging population.^[25]

Liao et al., (2023) explored how social support influences poverty among older adults in China. Using data from 2,683 individuals aged 60 and above with medical expenses, the study found that both formal (e.g., health insurance) and informal (e.g., family financial aid) support significantly reduced poverty risk. Published in BMC Geriatrics, this research highlights the need to strengthen social support systems amid urbanization and shifting family dynamics to safeguard the well-being of aging populations.^[26]

Scientometrics is the study of the measurement of scientific and technological progress. Haitun treats ‘Scientometrics’, as scientific disciplines, which performs reproducible measurement of scientific activity. Now a days Scientometrics is one of the truly interdisciplinary research fields extended to almost all scientific fields.^[27] Scientometrics is a distinct discipline that has emerged from citation-based domain visualization of the sciences. Scientometrics is the science of measuring and analysing scientific research. Current scientometric studies are tremendously focusing on the interrelated issues of ageing and poverty, highlighting the obstacles facing older people around the world. The growing number of older people, especially in low- and middle-income countries, has prompted scientists to investigate the multifaceted effects that poverty has on this population. A thorough investigation by Rojas-Montesino et al., (2022) looked at trends in aging and poverty research between 2000 and 2021 using bibliometric analysis. Their findings indicated a growing recognition of the urgent need to address the plight of older adults living in poverty and a significant increase in publications addressing this issue, particularly after 2015. Utilizing VOSviewer to visualize co-authorship networks and citation relationships, the authors were able to identify key researchers and institutions leading this field by utilizing data from well-known databases like Scopus and Web of Science.^[28]

Recent research has highlighted a growing trend in collaboration among scholars in aging poverty studies. Akinrolie et al., (2024) emphasize the need for comprehensive strategies to address aging challenges in Sub-Saharan Africa. Similarly, studies on telemedicine in older adults have illustrated the integration of technology and healthcare to enhance elderly care. An analysis of 586 papers from 252 countries or regions published in 246 journals and authored by 2,750 researchers further demonstrates the expanding global engagement in this field. These findings reinforce the importance of policies and community interventions that promote interdisciplinary collaboration to address the complex issues of ageing and poverty.^[29]

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly heightened the economic vulnerability of older adults, exacerbating existing disparities. Many faced financial insecurity due to job losses and reduced economic activity, as well as increased mental health challenges stemming from social isolation and stress.^[30] Study to address these challenges, swift policy responses and targeted interventions are essential. Recommendations include enhancing social support systems, implementing financial assistance programs, and ensuring accessible healthcare services to support older adults during crises.^[31] Albrecht et al., (2006) found that over 20% of Americans aged 65 and older live in counties facing both high infection rates and significant economic insecurity.^[31]

Sabri et al., (2022) conducted a bibliometric analysis of aging population research from 2001 to 2021, revealing a growing scholarly interest in health, social support, and policy issues. This study identified influential authors, key journals, and increasing publication trends. Importantly, it exposed gaps in the experiences of older adults in low-income settings. The authors emphasized the need for interdisciplinary approaches, underscoring the importance of addressing these overlooked areas to inform future gerontological research and guide evidence-based policy development in this field.^[32] Likewise, Oladinrin et al., (2021) conducted a scientometric analysis on “aging in place,” highlighting key authors, themes, and trends. The study revealed a growing interest in healthcare, social support, and environmental aspects but identified research gaps in low-income countries, calling for more funding and interdisciplinary efforts to improve aging practices globally.^[33]

However, it also identifies gaps, particularly in low-income nations, and emphasizes the need for increased funding and interdisciplinary collaboration to enhance aging in place practices.

However, scientometric analysis provides valuable insights into the field by systematically assessing research trends, major contributions, and emerging themes within literature.^[34] Bibliometric and scientometric analyses have emerged as essential tools for mapping the intellectual landscape of this field, identifying key research trends, influential publications, and emerging thematic clusters.^[28] Such analyses facilitate a deeper understanding of interdisciplinary collaborations and highlight research gaps that require further exploration.^[35]

This study aims to accomplish the following objectives:

1. What are the publication and citation trends on aging poverty research from 2015 to 2025?
2. Who are the most productive contributors (authors, countries, and affiliations)?
3. What are the leading sources of publications and document types?
4. To determine the corresponding authors, highly cited countries, and most globally cited documents.
5. To determine the author productivity through Lotka’s Law.
6. To identify the three-field plot, word cloud, mapping the co-occurrence network, thematic map, and thematic evolution.
7. To highlight the factorial map description and the map showing collaborations between countries.

The research data for this study were sourced from the Scopus database. The database was used to retrieve research on aging poverty published between January 1, 2015, and June 23, 2025. A total of 1921 documents were identified through this search. A literature search was conducted on June 23, 2025, using the advanced document search feature with the query “aging poverty” to extract relevant publications within the specified time range. The search query used for this bibliometric analysis was as follows: (TITLE-ABS-KEY (“aging” OR “ageing” OR “older adults” OR “elderly” OR “senior citizens” OR “older people”)) AND (TITLE-ABS-KEY (“poverty” OR “economic insecurity” OR “income inequality” OR “financial hardship” OR “low income”)) AND (DOCTYPE (ar)).

This bibliometric analysis highlighted the gathering of key information related 0n aging poverty research. The extracted data included study titles, author names, affiliations, keywords, publication years, total citations, number of cited and uncited papers (CP and NCP, respectively), average citations per paper (C/P), and type of publication (original research or review). These details were collected in alignment with the study’s objectives, and after applying strict inclusion and exclusion criteria to ensure the relevance and quality of the selected literature.

Additionally, bibliometric methods were applied to examine research trends, leading sources, influential authors, highly cited works, and patterns of collaboration among institutions, countries, and researchers in the field of poverty and aging. The PRISMA diagram illustrates the data extraction and filtration process for the bibliometric study focused on aging poverty research, covering English-language publications from 2015 to 2025. Initially, 1921 records were identified through a database search. In the first refinement step, 86 records were excluded because of missing or deleted DOIs. 106 were excluded due to irrelevance or insufficient information. The final analysis included 1729 items. Data were analyzed using the Bibliometrix R package, VOSviewer, OpenRefine, and MS Excel (Figure 1).

Figure 1:
PRISMA diagram of data extraction and filtration process.

Table 1 presents a comprehensive bibliometric overview of 1,729 documents published across 934 sources indexed in the Scopus database between 2015 and 2025. Spanning 11 years, this dataset offers valuable insights into the evolution of research trends in this domain. Despite the reasonably sized dataset, the annual growth rate of publications showed a negative trend of -2.86%, suggesting a potential decline in scholarly output, possibly due to shifting research priorities, publication delays or changes in indexing practices.

The average document age of 4.91 years reflects the recency of the literature, ensuring relevance to ongoing academic discussions. The citation impact was moderately strong, with an average of 22.84 citations per document. However, the absence of reference data (zero references recorded) poses a major limitation for advanced bibliometric techniques, including co-citation, bibliographic coupling and historiographic mapping.

Collaboration is a hallmark of this research landscape, as evidenced by the 6,102 contributing authors and an average of 4.3 co-authors per paper. Single-authored works constitute only 273 entries, further supporting the dominance of team-based research in the field. Notably, 26.43% of the documents involved international co-authorship, indicating a robust level of cross-border collaborations.

Thematic diversity is also prominent, with 3,878 author keywords and 6,828 Keywords Plus entries, revealing a wide-ranging interdisciplinary scope. This diversity presents opportunities for further exploration of thematic clusters and emerging research areas. While the analysis highlights a collaborative and influential field, the lack of reference data and declining output trends indicate areas that require further investigation.

Figure 2 presents the annual trends in publications and citations related to aging and poverty from 2015-2025. The data reveal a fluctuating but generally upward trajectory in the number of publications, indicating a sustained scholarly interest in the subject. The highest number of publications was recorded in 2021 (184), followed closely by 2024 (180) and 2019 (179).

Figure 2:
Publications and citations trends.

Citation trends, on the other hand, peaked earlier, with 2017 recording the highest number of citations (7780), followed by 2015 (6413) and 2018 (6915). This suggests that earlier publications have had more time to accumulate citations, highlighting their foundational influence. From 2021 onwards, a noticeable decline in citation counts was observed, with the lowest in 2025 (31), likely due to the recency of those publications.

Therefore, the table reflects both the growing volume of research and the evolving impact of scholarly contributions in the area of aging and poverty over the 11 years.

Figure 3 presents the distribution of document types retrieved from the dataset, which totaled 1,729 records. The most prevalent document type was the article, accounting for 1,334 records and representing 77.15% of the total output. This highlights the dominance of peer-reviewed journal publications in this field. Review articles and book chapters followed with 130 (7.52%) and 126 (7.29%) records, respectively, indicating significant engagement with secondary and scholarly compilation literature.

Figure 3:
Document types information.

Other forms of scholarly communication, such as editorials (1.97%), notes (2.26%), and conference papers (1.33%), have modest contributions to the literature. Less frequent document types included letters (0.98%), books (1.21%), and short surveys (0.23%). The least represented type was erratum, with only one record (0.06%), indicating minimal post-publication corrections.

This distribution suggests a strong emphasis on formal scholarly discourse through journal articles while also reflecting a diverse range of publication formats that contribute to the dissemination of research findings.

Table 2 presents the top-ranking sources of Aging Poverty research. The leading source, PLOS One, leads with the highest number of publications (TP=59) and total citations (TC=1743), with a strong ACPP of 29.54, indicating both high productivity and influence. Springer EBooks follows in publication count (TP=42), though it records a low citation impact (ACPP=3.83) and no visible collaboration (TLS=0).

The International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (TP=38) is notable for its strong network integration (TLS=12), reflecting significant co-citation and bibliographic coupling with other journals. The Journals of Gerontology Series B and The Gerontologist show high ACPP values of 26.75 and 28.68, respectively, indicating that while fewer in number, their articles are highly cited.

Notably, the International Journal for Equity in Health had the highest ACPP of 38.00, despite having fewer articles (TP=17), suggesting exceptional influence per publication.

Journals such as BMC Public Health, Social Science and Medicine, BMC Geriatrics, and Ageing and Society exhibit a balanced profile of output and citation performance, and several also show moderate-to-strong TLS values, indicating centrality in the research network.

Sources such as Routledge EBooks and Social Science and Medicine, despite having no recorded TLS, contribute significantly in terms of citations, suggesting a stand-alone impact rather than a network-based influence.

Therefore, this table highlights the diverse range of sources contributing to the field, distinguishing between high-output platforms, highly cited journals, and those with strong bibliometric linkages.

Table 3 presents the most productive authors in the field based on both total publications and fractionalized authorship. Evans MK tops the list with 61 publications and a fractionalized count of 10.03, followed by Zonderman AB with 57 publications and 9.17 fractionalized contributions. A group of authors, including Beydoun MA, Koyanagi A, and Waldstein SR, contributed 18 articles, with fractionalized scores ranging from 2.35 to 2.86, reflecting their varying degrees of co-authorship. Authors such as Park S (14 articles, 4.45 fractionalized) and Liu Y (9 articles, 3.09 fractionalized) demonstrated high fractionalized productivity relative to their total output, indicating substantial contributions. The table highlights that while publication counts are important, the fractionalized score offers a more nuanced measure of an author’s actual involvement and intellectual contribution to research output. This dual-metric analysis helps identify prolific, impactful, and actively engaged researchers within the scholarly domain.

Table 4 and Figure 4 presents the distribution of author productivity based on Lotka’s law, which predicts the frequency of publication by authors in a given field. The table shows that a vast majority of authors (5439; 89.1%) published only one document, aligning with Lotka’s observation that most researchers are one-time contributors. The proportion of authors decreased as the number of publications increased, with only a small number contributing multiple papers, such as 450 authors (7.4%) producing two documents, and fewer than 1% contributing five or more. The final column compares the observed author productivity with the theoretical values predicted by Lotka’s Law. While there is a general trend of declining author count with increased productivity, slight deviations from the theoretical model suggest field-specific authorship patterns and possible collaborative influences.

Figure 4:
Author productivity through Lotka’s Law.

Table 5 focused that the Harvard University ranks first in the table, contributing 36 publications with 3539 citations and an impressive ACPP of 98.31, highlighting its high research impact. Johns Hopkins University and the National Institute on Aging both recorded the highest number of publications (TP=53); however, while Johns Hopkins exhibits a moderate ACPP (37.42), the National Institute on Aging shows the lowest ACPP (19.23) but leads in collaboration with the highest Total Link Strength (45).

University College London (ACPP: 128.44) and University of Maryland, Baltimore (ACPP: 134.30) stand out for their high citation impact, despite relatively fewer publications. Notably, University of Pennsylvania records the highest ACPP (175.32), demonstrating exceptional scholarly influence with just 19 papers.

Stanford University, University of Michigan, and University of Southern California also show strong performance, balancing productivity and citation impact. University of Oxford is unique for having no recorded collaborative links (Total Link Strength: 0), despite its reasonable output and ACPP.

Institutions such as National Institutes of Health and Washington University in St. Louis show high collaborative strength (30 and 32 respectively), reflecting their active involvement in co-authored research.

Table 6 focused that the corresponding author’s country collaboration plot offers a detailed snapshot of global research productivity and international collaboration trends. The United States leads in overall output, followed by China and the United Kingdom, highlighting their strong domestic research capacities, institutional infrastructure and funding. While most countries produce more SCPs than MCPs, nations such as the UK, Australia, and Canada exhibit higher MCP ratios, indicating greater international engagement. Notably, France (61.5%), Ghana (57.1%), and the Netherlands (53.8%) stand out for their collaborative orientation. In contrast, countries such as the USA (16.6%), China (18.7%), and India (17.1%) maintain lower MCP ratios, suggesting dominant domestic research ecosystems. However, a lower MCP does not imply limited collaboration, as these countries may partner with nations outside the top group or operate large internal networks. The plot must be contextualized within the subject field and interpreted alongside limitations such as SCOPUS’s coverage and varying authorship norms. Ultimately, the data underscore how research culture, national policies, and international priorities shape global scientific collaboration patterns, offering critical insights into the dynamics of knowledge production.

Table 7 illustrates the most highly cited countries contributing to the research domain under study based on Total Citations (TC) and average article citations. The United States ranked first with a remarkable 16,649 citations and an average of 34.60 citations per article, indicating its dominant influence and leadership in scholarly output. The United Kingdom follows with 3,533 citations and a solid average of 29.70 citations per article, reflecting its sustained, academic impact. China, despite ranking third in total citations (2,582), shows a comparatively moderate average of 18.60 citations, suggesting a larger volume of publications with relatively lower individual-article influence. Interestingly, Kenya ranks sixth in total citations (558) but records the highest average citations per article at 69.80, indicating the presence of a few highly impactful papers in the country. Canada (1,296; 19.30), Australia (975; 25.70), and Italy (509; 22.10) demonstrate strong citation performance, reflecting their global collaboration and research excellence. India (554; 15.80), Germany (553; 15.40), and Korea (526; 13.80) showed moderate citation averages, contributing significantly to the overall literature. These findings underscore the geographical diversity and influence of scholarly contributions, with developed countries maintaining a stronghold, while emerging economies also demonstrate a growing research impact in specific high-citation studies.

Table 8 highlights the most globally cited documents in the dataset, showcasing high-impact scholarly contributions that significantly influenced the research landscape. The top-ranked paper by Black et al., (2017) published in The Lancet received the highest total citations (TC=1906) with an average of 211.78 citations per year (TCPY) and a normalized citation (NTC) score of 38.22, indicating its sustained relevance and broad academic reach. Similarly, Foreman et al., (2018), also published in The Lancet, recorded 1832 total citations and the highest TCPY (229.00), reflecting its rapid uptake in the scholarly community. Other notable contributions include works by Noble et al., (2015) in Nature Neuroscience (TC=974), Hair et al., (2015) in JAMA Pediatrics (TC=672), and Liu et al., (2018) in Acta Geographica Sinica (TC=540), indicating disciplinary diversity and global influence. The documents span leading journals in medicine, neuroscience, geography, and psychology, suggesting interdisciplinary engagement with issues at the intersection of health, development, and socioeconomic conditions. Normalized citation values (NTC) further confirm the broader, time-adjusted significance of these studies. Collectively, these highly cited papers represent foundational work that continues to shape academic discourse across multiple domains.

Figure 5 illustrated that the bibliometric analysis utilizes a Three-Field Plot to visualize and interpret the interrelationships among author keywords (KW_Merged), author countries (AU_CO), and individual authors (AU) based on SCOPUS data, offering insight into research focus areas, geographic distribution of scholarly output, and key contributors. Positioned centrally, the author country field reveals the United States as the dominant contributor, followed by China and the United Kingdom, indicating strong research output from these regions. On the left, prevalent keywords such as “human,” “humans,” “poverty,” “female,” and “male” highlight the thematic concentration on human populations and socioeconomic issues, particularly poverty, likely within public health or social science domains. On the right, individual authors appear, though only a sample is visible, with bands connecting each field to show the intensity and frequency of their associations. The visual density of links between the United States and terms like “poverty” and “humans” suggests strong national research engagement in those areas, while the relationships between authors and countries illustrate institutional affiliations and potential regional leadership. Although this static analysis offers a snapshot, future studies might incorporate time-based trends or co-authorship networks to deepen understanding of evolving research patterns, international collaborations, and subject-specific growth within the dataset’s domain.

Figure 5:
Three-Field Plot.

Figure 6 lists the most frequently occurring words in the analyzed literature, reflecting the key thematic focuses and subject populations within the research dataset. The word “human” appears most frequently, with 1125 occurrences, followed closely by “poverty” (1049) and “humans” (997), indicating a strong emphasis on human-centric studies, particularly in relation to socioeconomic conditions.

Figure 6:
WordCloud of the most frequent terms.

Terms such as “female” (787), “male” (728), “adult” (477), and “middle aged” (428) suggest that the studies often targeted demographic analyses, focusing on gender and age-related differences. The presence of “aging” (708) and “aged” (656) highlights significant interest in the aging population, consistent with gerontology or aging-related poverty research.

Additionally, the term “article” (653) may reflect metadata tagging or bibliometric indexing rather than thematic content. Overall, this frequency distribution underscores the research focus on human development, poverty, and aging across adult life stages, with gender- and age-specific distinctions prominently addressed.

Figure 7 highlights that the bibliometric study visualizes a keyword co-occurrence network from Scopus data where “aging” emerges as a central theme tightly linked to socioeconomic variables like “poverty” and demographic terms such as “male” and “female” while methodological keywords like “cross-sectional studies” and “longitudinal study” form a dense cluster around “article” indicating strong empirical research focus, and multiple thematic communitisidentified using the Walktrap algorithm highlight the intersection of aging with psychology, public health, income inequality, and human development although certain isolated terms like “child” suggest underrepresented subtopics due to filtering parameters, the overall structure reflects an interdisciplinary and data-driven approach to studying aging in social and health contexts.

Figure 7:
Mapping the co-occurrence network.

Figure 8 shows that the bibliometric study maps the intellectual structure and thematic evolution of aging-related research using strategic diagrams derived from the Scopus database. The two-dimensional map plots research clusters based on centrality (importance in the field) and density (development level) and identifies five main themes. “Aging Population” and “Female” emerged as motor themes, reflecting well-developed and central research. “Growth, development and aging” forms a niche theme, specialized yet peripheral. “Human” serves as a basic theme central but underdeveloped while “Child” appears as an emerging or declining one. Clustering was performed using the Walktrap algorithm on the keyword co-occurrence networks. The results were interpreted using PageRank centrality. Each cluster was analyzed for its top keywords and influential articles. These findings highlight disparities in research focus and development, guiding future research directions by identifying foundational areas and underexplored niches.

Figure 8:
Thematic Map.

Figure 9 shown that the bibliometric study explores the dynamic evolution and strategic positioning of research themes from 2015 to 2025, revealing how global events like the COVID-19 pandemic reshaped scholarly focus, as visualized through topic evolution and strategic mapping plots that highlight the emergence, decline, and continuity of key concepts such as “human,” “aging,” and “clinical studies”; during 2015-2018, research centered on “growth, development and aging,” while “mortality” and “poverty” appeared as motor themes, but by 2019-2020, the outbreak of the pandemic introduced themes like “pandemic,” “China,” and “health care system,” shifting scholarly attention towards zoonotic transmission and gendered health impacts, and by 2021-2023, “COVID-19” remained central as a niche theme while meta-research became prominent through the rise of “article” as a motor theme, culminating in 2024-2025 with “major clinical study,” “epidemiology,” and “older adults” gaining centrality, indicating a strategic turn toward intervention research and long-term impact studies; consistently, “human” remained a foundational yet underdeveloped theme, suggesting sustained relevance, while “growth and development” declined, and the thematic presence of “United States” signals regional specificity, making this analysis not only a map of shifting priorities but also a guidepost for future research on aging, health disparities, and post-pandemic recovery in vulnerable populations.

Figure 9:
Thematic Evolution.

Figure 10 illustrates the intellectual structure of aging-related research by applying Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA) to the “KW_Merged” field from the Scopus database, using a minDegree threshold of 97 and without stemming, which preserves keyword variations. The resulting factorial map revealed two main dimensions. Dimension 1, which explains 81.94% of the variance, delineates the thematic continuum between general aging demographics and specific age groups, with keywords such as “growth, development and aging” and “older adults” anchoring one end, and “aged, 80 and over” on the opposite, thus highlighting a contrast between broad societal aging themes and focused geriatric research. Dimension 2, accounting for 5.38% of the variance, distinguishes socio-economic and clinical aspects, as evidenced by clusters containing “social status,” “educational status,” and “clinical study.” Prominent thematic clusters include Aging and Elderly Care, Age-Related Research, Socioeconomic and Health Factors, and Research Methodologies, with geographic or policy-based studies situated near the origin, indicating cross-cutting relevance. Highly contributing terms, farthest from the origin such as “priority journal” and “child” provide discriminative power for dimensional interpretation. The analysis suggests a robust interplay between general public health concerns and methodological rigor, reflecting a mature interdisciplinary research field. Nevertheless, the map’s structure also underscores SCOPUS’s inherent indexing biases and the trade-off introduced by a high minDegree value, which may obscure emerging topics. Recommendations include exploring alternate fields and time-sliced analyses to uncover longitudinal shifts and conducting co-occurrence network analyses to complement and deepen the interpretation of thematic clusters.

Figure 10:
Factorial Map Description.

Figure 11 shown that the bibliometric study presents a global overview of international scientific collaboration using a visual world map derived from Scopus database, where darker color intensity indicates higher research output and connecting lines reflect co-authorship-based collaborations. Figure highlights the top international scientific collaboration pairs based on co-authorship frequency, with the United States (USA) emerging as the most central actor, involved in six of the ten highest-frequency bilateral collaborations. The strongest partnership was between the USA and the United Kingdom (35 collaborations), followed closely by USA-Canada (32), indicating strong North Atlantic and North American research ties. The UK also plays a central role in European collaboration, particularly with Italy and Spain (21 collaborations each), reflecting intra-European cooperation.

Figure 11:
Country collaboration world map.

Emerging patterns include transpacific ties, with USA-Korea (19) and USA-China (18) collaborations, illustrating the growing scientific integration between Western and East Asian countries. The USA-South Africa collaboration (18) signifies a notable North-South research engagement. Additionally, the Spain-Italy collaboration (16) showed a strong Southern European collaboration, and China’s collaboration with the UK (15) further supports the increasing East-West scientific interaction. The USA-Australia link (14) underscores the active collaboration within the Anglosphere.

The scientometric findings of this study reveal significant insights into the evolving landscape of poverty and aging research from 2015-2025. The data show a fluctuating publication trend with a moderate decline in the annual growth rate, suggesting shifting research priorities or saturation in specific areas. Despite this, the average citations per document remained relatively high, indicating the continued relevance and impact of core studies.

One notable observation is the dominance Rodrik’s dominance of journal articles, which constituted more than 77% of the total output. This reflects the academic community’s reliance on peer-reviewed platforms to disseminate knowledge in the field. Leading journals such as PLOS One, The Lancet, and The International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health have served as major conduits for influential research.

In terms of author productivity, the application of Lotka’s law highlights a classic bibliometric pattern: a small number of authors are highly productive, whereas the vast majority contribute only once. Specifically, 89.1% of the authors published a single document, which is consistent with Lotka’s theoretical expectations. However, slight deviations from the model suggest field-specific factors, such as high levels of collaboration or the interdisciplinary nature of aging and poverty research. Prolific contributors like Michele K. Evans and Alan B. Zonderman have demonstrated sustained academic engagement, often in collaborative teams with high citation impact.

The study also shows strong international collaboration. Countries such as the USA, the UK, and China have emerged as major contributors. While the USA leads in volume, countries such as the UK and Canada have demonstrated higher proportions of multi-country publications, indicating broader global engagement. Affiliations such as Harvard University and Johns Hopkins University are distinguished by both productivity and influence.

Keyword co-occurrence and thematic mapping revealed central topics such as “poverty,” “human,” “aging,” and “female,” reflecting the demographic and socio-economic focus of the field. Thematic evolution plots show a shift from broad developmental themes to specific clinical and intervention-based research, especially during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Therefore, this study provides a comprehensive mapping of scholarly activity in the field of aging poverty research. The findings emphasize the need for continued interdisciplinary collaboration, a focus on policy-relevant outcomes, and strategic attention to emerging themes that address the complex and growing needs of older populations facing economic hardship.

Future research should focus on the underexplored intersections between aging, gender, and regional disparities in poverty, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Longitudinal and comparative studies are needed to understand the long-term socioeconomic and health impacts of poverty on older populations. The integration of advanced bibliometric tools with machine learning can uncover hidden patterns and thematic evolution in aging-related research. Expanding data sources beyond Scopus and incorporating qualitative insights may offer a richer contextual understanding. Finally, cross-disciplinary collaborations are essential for developing inclusive policies that address the multifaceted nature of aging and poverty in a global context.

This scientometric analysis provides a structured overview of global research trends on aging and poverty from 2015 to 2025. The study reveals a growing yet fluctuating scholarly interest in the intersection of aging and economic vulnerability, with the United States, United Kingdom, and China emerging as key contributors. The analysis demonstrated that journal articles dominated the literature, with PLOS One and other leading journals serving as major publication platforms. Author productivity analysis using Lotka’s Law confirmed the expected pattern: most authors contributed a single publication, whereas only a few were highly prolific. Influential institutions, such as Harvard University and Johns Hopkins University, play pivotal roles in advancing this field, and international collaboration is evident across multiple regions. Thematic and co-occurrence analyses highlighted a multidimensional focus linking aging with poverty, healthcare, gender, and social support. Despite a slight negative growth trend in publication output, the overall impact and collaboration patterns suggest a maturing field with increasing interdisciplinary engagement in recent years. However, gaps remain, particularly in underrepresented regions and in longitudinal and policy-oriented research. Future studies should deepen the integration of socioeconomic, health, and policy data to support targeted interventions and guide effective policymaking for the aging poor.