what is research gap in research paper

How To Find A Research Gap, Quickly

A step-by-step guide for new researchers

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Reviewer: Eunice Rautenbach (DTech) | April 2023

If you’ve got a dissertation, thesis or research project coming up, one of the first (and most important) things you’ll need to do is find a suitable research gap . In this post, we’ll share a straightforward process to help you uncover high-quality, original research gaps in a very time-efficient manner.

Overview: Finding Research Gaps

• What exactly is a research gap?
• Research gap vs research topic
• How to find potential research gaps
• How to evaluate research gaps (and topics)
• Key takeaways

What is a research gap?

As a starting point, it’s useful to first define what we mean by research gap, to ensure we’re all on the same page. The term “research gap” gets thrown around quite loosely by students and academics alike, so let’s clear that up.

Simply put, a research gap is any space where there’s a lack of solid, agreed-upon research regarding a specific topic, issue or phenomenon. In other words, there’s a lack of established knowledge and, consequently, a need for further research.

Let’s look at a hypothetical example to illustrate a research gap.

Within the existing research regarding factors affect job satisfaction , there may be a wealth of established and agreed-upon empirical work within a US and UK context , but very little research within Eastern nations such as Japan or Korea . Given that these nations have distinctly different national cultures and workforce compositions compared to the West, it’s plausible that the factors that contribute toward job satisfaction may also be different. Therefore, a research gap emerges for studies that explore this matter.

This example is purely hypothetical (and there’s probably plenty of research covering this already), but it illustrates the core point that a research gap reflects a lack of firmly established knowledge regarding a specific matter . Given this lack, an opportunity exists for researchers (like you) to go on and fill the gap.

So, it’s the same as a research topic?

Not quite – but they are connected. A research gap refers to an area where there’s a lack of settled research , whereas a research topic outlines the focus of a specific study . Despite being different things, these two are related because research gaps are the birthplace of research topics. In other words, by identifying a clear research gap, you have a foundation from which you can build a research topic for your specific study. Your study is unlikely to resolve the entire research gap on it’s own, but it will contribute towards it .

If you’d like to learn more, we’ve got a comprehensive post that covers research gaps (including the different types of research gaps), as well as an explainer video below.

How to find a research gap

Now that we’ve defined what a research gap is, it’s time to get down to the process of finding potential research gaps that you can use as a basis for potential research topics. Importantly, it’s worth noting that this is just one way (of many) to find a research gap (and consequently a topic). We’re not proposing that it’s the only way or best way, but it’s certainly a relatively quick way to identify opportunities.

Step 1: Identify your broad area of interest

The very first step to finding a research gap is to decide on your general area of interest . For example, if you were undertaking a dissertation as part of an MBA degree, you may decide that you’re interested in corporate reputation, HR strategy, or leadership styles. As you can see, these are broad categories – there’s no need to get super specific just yet. Of course, if there is something very specific that you’re interested in, that’s great – but don’t feel pressured to narrow it down too much right now.

Equally important is to make sure that this area of interest is allowed by your university or whichever institution you’ll be proposing your research to. This might sound dead obvious, but you’ll be surprised how many times we’ve seen students run down a path with great excitement, only to later learn that their university wants a very specific area of focus in terms of topic (and their area of interest doesn’t qualify).

Step 2: Do an initial literature scan

Once you’ve pinned down your broad area (or areas) of interest, the next step is to head over to Google Scholar to undertake an initial literature scan . If you’re not familiar with this tool, Google Scholar is a great starting point for finding academic literature on pretty much any topic, as it uses Google’s powerful search capabilities to hunt down relevant academic literature. It’s certainly not the be-all and end-all of literature search tools, but it’s a useful starting point .

Within Google Scholar, you’ll want to do a few searches using keywords that are relevant to your area of interest. Sticking with our earlier example, we could use the key phrase “job satisfaction”, or we may want to get a little more specific – perhaps “job satisfaction for millennials” or “job satisfaction in Japan”.

It’s always a good idea to play around with as many keywords/phrases as you can think up.  Take an iterative approach here and see which keywords yield the most relevant results for you. Keep each search open in a new tab, as this will help keep things organised for the next steps.

Once you’ve searched for a few different keywords/phrases, you’ll need to do some refining for each of the searches you undertook. Specifically, you’ll need to filter the results down to the most recent papers . You can do this by selecting the time period in the top left corner (see the example below).

Filtering to the current year is typically a good choice (especially for fast-moving research areas), but in some cases, you may need to filter to the last two years . If you’re undertaking this task in January or February, for example, you’ll likely need to select a two-year period.

Need a helping hand?

Step 3: Review and shortlist articles that interest you

Once you’ve run a few searches using different keywords and phrases, you’ll need to scan through the results to see what looks most relevant and interesting to you. At this stage, you can just look at the titles and abstracts (the description provided by Google Scholar) – don’t worry about reading the actual article just yet.

Next, select 5 – 10 articles that interest you and open them up. Here, we’re making the assumption that your university has provided you with access to a decent range of academic databases. In some cases, Google Scholar will link you directly to a PDF of the article, but in most cases, you’ll need paid access. If you don’t have this (for example, if you’re still applying to a university), you can look at two options:

Open-access articles – these are free articles which you can access without any journal subscription. A quick Google search (the regular Google) will help you find open-access journals in your area of interest, but you can also have a look at DOAJ and Elsevier Open Access.

DeepDyve – this is a monthly subscription service that allows you to get access to a broad range of journals. At the time of shooting this video, their monthly subscription is around $50 and they do offer a free trial, which may be sufficient for your project.

Step 4: Skim-read your article shortlist

Now, it’s time to dig into your article shortlist and do some reading. But don’t worry, you don’t need to read the articles from start to finish – you just need to focus on a few key sections.

Specifically, you’ll need to pay attention to the following:

• The abstract (which you’ve probably already read a portion of in Google Scholar)
• The introduction – this will give you a bit more detail about the context and background of the study, as well as what the researchers were trying to achieve (their research aims)
• The discussion or conclusion – this will tell you what the researchers found

By skimming through these three sections for each journal article on your shortlist, you’ll gain a reasonable idea of what each study was about, without having to dig into the painful details. Generally, these sections are usually quite short, so it shouldn’t take you too long.

Step 5: Go “FRIN hunting”

This is where the magic happens. Within each of the articles on your shortlist, you’ll want to search for a few very specific phrases , namely:

• Future research
• Further research
• Research opportunities
• Research directions

All of these terms are commonly found in what we call the “FRIN” section . FRIN stands for “further research is needed”. The FRIN is where the researchers explain what other researchers could do to build on their study, or just on the research area in general. In other words, the FRIN section is where you can find fresh opportunities for novel research . Most empirical studies will either have a dedicated FRIN section or paragraph, or they’ll allude to the FRIN toward the very end of the article. You’ll need to do a little scanning, but it’s usually pretty easy to spot.

It’s worth mentioning that naturally, the FRIN doesn’t hand you a list of research gaps on a platter. It’s not a silver bullet for finding research gaps – but it’s the closest thing to it. Realistically, the FRIN section helps you shortcut the gap-hunting process  by highlighting novel research avenues that are worth exploring.

This probably sounds a little conceptual, so let’s have a look at a few examples:

The impact of overeducation on job outcomes: Evidence from Saudi Arabia (Alzubaidi, 2020)

If you scroll down to the bottom of this article, you’ll see there’s a dedicated section called “Limitations and directions for future research”. Here they talk about the limitations of the study and provide suggestions about how future researchers could improve upon their work and overcome the limitations.

Perceived organizational support and job satisfaction: a moderated mediation model of proactive personality and psychological empowerment (Maan et al, 2020)

In this article, within the limitations section, they provide a wonderfully systematic structure where they discuss each limitation, followed by a proposal as to how future studies can overcome the respective limitation. In doing so, they are providing very specific research opportunities for other researchers.

Medical professionals’ job satisfaction and telemedicine readiness during the COVID-19 pandemic: solutions to improve medical practice in Egypt (El-Mazahy et al, 2023)

In this article, they don’t have a dedicated section discussing the FRIN, but we can deduct it based on the limitations section. For example, they state that an evaluation of the knowledge about telemedicine and technology-related skills would have enabled studying their independent effect on the perception of telemedicine.

Follow this FRIN-seeking process for the articles you shortlisted and map out any potentially interesting research gaps . You may find that you need to look at a larger number of articles to find something interesting, or you might find that your area of interest shifts as you engage in the reading – this is perfectly natural. Take as much time as you need to develop a shortlist of potential research gaps that interest you.

Importantly, once you’ve developed a shortlist of potential research gaps, you need to return to Google Scholar to double-check that there aren’t fresh studies that have already addressed the gap. Remember, if you’re looking at papers from two years ago in a fast-moving field, someone else may have jumped on it . Nevertheless, there could still very well be a unique angle you could take – perhaps a contextual gap (e.g. a specific country, industry, etc.).

Ultimately, the need for originality will depend on your specific university’s requirements and the level of study. For example, if you’re doing an undergraduate research project, the originality requirements likely won’t be as gruelling as say a Masters or PhD project. So, make sure you have a clear understanding of what your university’s expectations are. A good way to do this is to look at past dissertations and theses for your specific programme. You can usually find these in the university library or by asking the faculty.

How to evaluate potential research gaps

Once you’ve developed a shortlist of potential research gaps (and resultant potential research topics) that interest you, you’ll need to systematically evaluate  them  to choose a winner. There are many factors to consider here, but some important ones include the following:

• Originality and value – is the topic sufficiently novel and will addressing it create value?
• Data access – will you be able to get access to the sample of interest?
• Costs – will there be additional costs involved for data collection and/or analysis?
• Timeframes – will you be able to collect and analyse the data within the timeframe required by your university?
• Supervisor support – is there a suitable supervisor available to support your project from start to finish?

To help you evaluate your options systematically, we’ve got a topic evaluation worksheet that allows you to score each potential topic against a comprehensive set of criteria. You can access the worksheet completely free of charge here .

Recap: Key Takeaways

We’ve covered quite a lot of ground in this post. Here are the key takeaways:

• A research gap is any space where there’s a lack of solid, agreed-upon research regarding a specific topic/issue/phenomenon.
• Unique research topics emerge from research gaps , so it’s essential to first identify high-quality research gaps before you attempt to define a topic.
• To find potential research gaps, start by seeking out recent journal articles on Google Scholar and pay particular attention to the FRIN section to identify novel opportunities.
• Once you have a shortlist of prospective research gaps and resultant topic ideas, evaluate them systematically using a comprehensive set of criteria.

If you’d like to get hands-on help finding a research gap and research topic, be sure to check out our private coaching service , where we hold your hand through the research journey, step by step.

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

Very useful for me, but i am still confusing review of literature review, how to find out topic related previous research.

Powerful notes! Thanks a lot.

This is helpful. Thanks a lot.

Thank you very much for this. It is really a great opportunity for me to learn the research journey.

Very Useful

It nice job

You have sharpened my articulations of these components to the core. Thanks so much.

It’s educative and an inspiring way of impacting research knowledge…

Thanks to the writer

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

Text for Mobile

What Is A Research Gap? (With Tips + Examples)

A research gap is a specific area within a field of study that remains unexplored or under-explored. Identifying a research gap involves recognizing where existing research is lacking or where there are unanswered questions that could provide opportunities for further investigation. Understanding research gaps is crucial for advancing knowledge, as it helps scholars and researchers focus their efforts on areas that can contribute significantly to their field.

What Is A Research Gap?

It is actually a question or any issue that needs to be solved by any pre-existing work or research in your area of study. A research gap can also exist where some new idea still needs to be studied.

Tips on Identifying Research Gap

Research always plays an essential role in acquiring more knowledge and addressing the gaps in different fields. When you are identifying a research gap, you are taking a very important step in the whole research process. This aids the researchers in contributing meaningful insights and triggers the knowledge boundaries.

Understanding the Literature You Are Studying: In order to identify any research gap, it is essential to have an excellent advertising of the preexisting literature in your study field.

Here, you need to conduct a review of many books, scholarly articles, conferences, and other relevant sources. In this way, you can get a good foundation as well as insights into any present state of in-depth knowledge in your own study area.

Defining Your Own Research Question: After getting a good knowledge of the pre-existing literature, you need to define a concise and clear idea of the research question. This research question needs to be very specific, attainable, measurable, time-bound and relevant. An acronym for this entire thing is known as SMART. This also needs to address any significant issue that still needs to be fully solved or adequately answered.

Identifying Your Study Objectives: Here, you need to identify the major objectives of your research paper. All these objectives need to be aligned with the identified research gap. These objectives always guide the researcher and aid you in determining the direction and scope of your research study.

Analyze the Existing Studies: Here, you need to analyze very carefully all the existing studies that are related to your research question. Here, it would help if you looked at the most common recurring findings, themes, and patterns of the discussed literature. Here, you also need to pay a lot of attention to the conflicted areas with the results, unanswered questions, and contradictory theories. These areas show the research gaps that can be explored later.

Consider The Practical Relevance: You always need to evaluate the very practical relevance of the research question as well as its potential impact on society. Here, it would help if you always considered the importance of addressing your own research gap as you identified it.

Here, you also need to assess whether your findings can contribute to the original theoretical framework and offer all the practical solutions for leading to the policy recommendations. These practical ads are relevant to the research paper and trigger its impact.

Consulting With the Experts and Peers: You always need to engage you’re discussing with your mentors, peers, and experts in your own field of study. Here, you always need to seek their opinions and perspectives on the research question to identify potential research gaps.

These can provide valuable insights into assumption challenges, and this helps you refine your research work. Your peers and experts can give you a new idea and help you identify the errors in your thinking.

Conducting Your Pilot Study: You need to conduct it to test the viability and feasibility of the research question. This pilot study provides you with feedback and data on the research design, approach and methodology.

This also helps you identify the potential limitations or challenges that need to be solved before conducting the full research studies.

Reflecting and Refining: You need to vividly reflect on the research progress to refine your research preferences. You need to add the objectives. As you go deeper into your research process, additional research gaps may be uncovered to refine your own research needs.

If you follow this process, you can adapt your own approach to ensure the research gaps.

As per the example of the research gap, identifying your research gap allows your research to contribute to gaining more knowledge to address the pre-existing limitations.

This way, you will understand the existing literature to define a crystal clear research statement. You can identify the research gaps by analyzing the existing studies to consider their relevance. According to the research gap finder, if you consult with your peers, doing all the pilot studies reflects on your research process progress.

If you follow the guide mentioned above, you can always embark on meaningful research studies to trigger your knowledge in your subject area and make a prominent contribution to your field.

Also Read: Struggling with Research Paper Writing?

Different Types of Research Gaps

Identifying research gaps is essential for advancing knowledge in any field. Research gaps are areas where more information is available or existing research needs to be more consistent or conclusive. Here are different types of research gaps:

• Evidence Gap

This gap occurs when no empirical evidence supports certain theories, practices, or interventions. It can also refer to areas where existing studies need to sufficiently cover the topic or lack rigorous methodological approaches.

Example: A need for randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness of a new drug.

• Knowledge Gap

This gap refers to areas where there is a deficiency in understanding or awareness about a particular topic. It can be due to outdated information, incomplete research, or the absence of research on emerging issues.

Example: Limited knowledge about the long-term effects of exposure to new environmental pollutants.

• Theoretical Gap

Theoretical gaps arise when existing theories do not fully explain certain phenomena or when there is a lack of theoretical frameworks to guide research in a particular area.

Example: More theoretical models need to be developed to explain the psychological impacts of social media usage on teenagers.

• Methodological Gap

Methodological gaps exist when current research methods are inadequate for addressing certain research questions or when there is a need for new or improved methodologies.

Example: More robust qualitative methods are needed to study the experiences of marginalized communities.

• Population Gap

This type of gap occurs when certain populations are underrepresented in research. It can involve demographics like age, gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or geographic location.

Example: Lack of research on the mental health of older adults living in rural areas.

Geographical Gap

Geographical gaps refer to areas or regions that are under-researched. These gaps highlight the need for studies in different geographic contexts to understand local issues better.

Example: Limited studies on the effects of climate change in the Arctic regions.

Strategies to Identify Research Gaps:

• Literature Reviews: Comprehensive reviews can help identify where current research is lacking or inconsistent.
• Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: These methods provide a structured approach to synthesize existing research and identify gaps.
• Expert Consultations: Discussions with experts in the field can uncover areas that require further investigation.
• Research Databases: Utilizing databases and citation analysis tools to track research trends and identify under-researched areas.
• Interdisciplinary Approaches: Engaging with multiple disciplines can reveal gaps that are not apparent within a single field.

Understanding and addressing these gaps is crucial for advancing research and knowledge across various domains.

Read More: How To Get A+ Grade In Research Paper?

What is a Research Gap Example?

A Research Paper Example gives you a very clear idea of how to find your research gaps and examples in textual forms. A few examples are given below:

• Context Healthcare: Although there have been enough researchers on the management of diabetes, there has been a research gap in understanding the impact of digital health interventions in the rural areas of Europe.
• Content environmental science: In a wealth of research regarding the huge environmental pollution caused by the use of plastics, there are fewer findings of how the plastic material really accumulates in certain areas like lakes, rivers, etc. and why these materials are never biodegradable.
• Context Education: The empirical research surrounding the online mode has become tremendously popular over the past few years. However, there needs to be more solid studies regarding the impact of the online learning process on the students who need special education. In each of these examples, you can see that the writer begins by acknowledging the preexisting reach results and then explains thoroughly the present area where the research gap really exists.

Also Read: Why Research Is Essential For Students? 20 Common Reasons!

How to Find a Research Gap?

After getting a very clear idea of various types of research gaps, the vet’s next question comes to mind is how to find a research gap. There is a basic 2 step strategy to find the research gap.

In the beginning, you need to find a lot of literature reviews, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews covering your research area of interest. Moreover, it would help if you dug into the very recent journals for wrapping your head in your own knowledge area.

Here, you can also study the current theses and dissertations, especially those in the doctoral degree courses. A number of dissertation databases, such as Open Access, EBSCO, Pro-Quest, etc., are very useful in this regard. Here. You also need to ensure that you are always looking for the most recent sources.

After gathering a good collection of these resources, you need to focus on further research opportunities. In this section, you need to state explicitly where more studies are needed. It would help if you also looked at the present research study’s limitation areas and where the research gaps might exist.

Following this procedure will help you become oriented to the present research area. This can serve as a foundation for finding the potential research gaps. Then, you need to shortlist the main ideas and evaluate them as per the given topic. It would help if you also looked only for the recent articles here.

Also Read:  Expert Literature Review Writing Services

How to Deal with Literature Gap?

In any project, a literature review is always very important. It helps you in identifying your excusing knowledge, methods and theories in your own field. However, conducting a literature review has its own challenges.

• Defiling your research question: The very first step is to define your own research question very clearly and briefly. It will help you narrow your scope and focus on the crucial sources. It would help if you used less information here. Your research must always be very specific, answerable, and original. The research project always needs to have real objectives and a purpose.
• Searching and selecting the sources: Your next step is to search and select the sources. That is very much reliable and relevant to your research field. There are a number of databases, like keywords, search engines, etc., related to your study field. However, there are also a lot of limitations to these tools, like currency, coverage, and quality of the sources. Here, certain criteria have to be applied to filter the sources, such as relevance, authority, timeline, and accuracy of the information.
• Analyzing and synthesizing the literature: This is the third step, where you need to analyze and synthesize the literature you selected. Here, you need to summarize the sources and compare, contrast and critique them. In this section, you also need to look for the similarities and differences, the strengths and weaknesses, and the gaps and inconsistencies of the literature review paper. The writers can also identify the major trends, themes, and debates in the discussed field. These should also be related to your research question.
• Fill in the gaps after identifying them: This is the 4th step to filling the literature review research paper. This gap needs to be addressed or is under the researched area and is to be addressed by you with the help of your knowledge. These gaps can be filled by looking for the limitations, contradictions or controversies in the review. You can also do this by asking new questions or proposing new ideas. The gaps can also be filled by providing the newest evidence, arguments or even insights related to your field of study.
• Organizing and structuring the literature review: This is the 5th step of your review, where you need to organize and structure the whole paper in a compact and logical manner. Here, you always need to follow certain guidelines as given by your institute and use the best style and font. Proper headings, subheading citations, and traditions should also be used here. This will help your readers follow your arguments and understand what you want to say. A very clear introduction should also be written, along with a good conclusion and summary to highlight your writing.
• Refining and Revising: The literature review is the final step of writing your literature review. Here, you need to ensure that your review is quite accurate, concise and clear. You must check your literature review thoroughly to make it free from errors, gaps, or inconsistencies in language, content, or presentation. Here, you can also seek feedback from your peers, experts or supervisors in your own field. Their suggestions will help you in performing well. The whore literature review should be thoroughly proofread and edited before the final submission.

Last but not least, never copy from any source; it will be considered plagiarism, and your paper will be cancelled then and there. Thus, write only from your own creativity and not from the writing and articles of other writers.

Read More: Dissertation Literature Review For Masters & PhD

Final Words

Writing a research paper is a challenging task. It would help if you had a lot of Research Skills to accomplish it. You will be given a Research topic on which you have to write. Your ultimate aim in writing the research paper is to get the top grade. This can be done by availing of the best online Case Study Help Service from a reliable provider. The Casestudyhelp is the best choice for you in this respect.

Why CaseStudyHelp?

• We will provide you with the best research gap example in the thesis
• Top online Research Paper Writing Service is provided by us with the most reasonable service charges
• Top grades are always assured by the online Dissertation Help service provided by us
• Our experts provide 24/7 hours of online help and support
• We have the top experts to work with us
• We provide a hundred per cent original and plagiarism-free research paper
• Our papers are also free from any errors

Clients all over the world are very happy and satisfied with our services. Thus, join us soon.

Author Bio:

Hi, I am Lyana Jones, the author of this blog. I am a well-experienced academic writer. We’ll help make your writing shine.

Please contact us anytime, tell us about your topic, and receive a 100% plagiarism-free paper with impeccable grammar and formatting.

View All Post

RELATED POST:

145+ Best Social Work Research Topics and Ideas to Use

130+ education research topics & ideas you must know, top 100+ accounting dissertation topics ideas for student, 7 advantages of dissertation writing you must know, 120+ tourism and hospitality dissertation topics.

Identifying Research Gaps to Pursue Innovative Research

This article is an excerpt from a lecture given by my Ph.D. guide, a researcher in public health. She advised us on how to identify research gaps to pursue innovative research in our fields.

What is a Research Gap?

Today we are talking about the research gap: what is it, how to identify it, and how to make use of it so that you can pursue innovative research. Now, how many of you have ever felt you had discovered a new and exciting research question , only to find that it had already been written about? I have experienced this more times than I can count. Graduate studies come with pressure to add new knowledge to the field. We can contribute to the progress and knowledge of humanity. To do this, we need to first learn to identify research gaps in the existing literature.

A research gap is, simply, a topic or area for which missing or insufficient information limits the ability to reach a conclusion for a question. It should not be confused with a research question, however. For example, if we ask the research question of what the healthiest diet for humans is, we would find many studies and possible answers to this question. On the other hand, if we were to ask the research question of what are the effects of antidepressants on pregnant women, we would not find much-existing data. This is a research gap. When we identify a research gap, we identify a direction for potentially new and exciting research.

How to Identify Research Gap?

Considering the volume of existing research, identifying research gaps can seem overwhelming or even impossible. I don’t have time to read every paper published on public health. Similarly, you guys don’t have time to read every paper. So how can you identify a research gap?

There are different techniques in various disciplines, but we can reduce most of them down to a few steps, which are:

• Identify your key motivating issue/question
• Identify key terms associated with this issue
• Review the literature, searching for these key terms and identifying relevant publications
• Review the literature cited by the key publications which you located in the above step
• Identify issues not addressed by  the literature relating to your critical  motivating issue

It is the last step which we all find the most challenging. It can be difficult to figure out what an article is  not  saying. I like to keep a list of notes of biased or inconsistent information. You could also track what authors write as “directions for future research,” which often can point us towards the existing gaps.

Different Types of Research Gaps

Identifying research gaps is an essential step in conducting research, as it helps researchers to refine their research questions and to focus their research efforts on areas where there is a need for more knowledge or understanding.

1. Knowledge gaps

These are gaps in knowledge or understanding of a subject, where more research is needed to fill the gaps. For example, there may be a lack of understanding of the mechanisms behind a particular disease or how a specific technology works.

2. Conceptual gaps

These are gaps in the conceptual framework or theoretical understanding of a subject. For example, there may be a need for more research to understand the relationship between two concepts or to refine a theoretical framework.

3. Methodological gaps

These are gaps in the methods used to study a particular subject. For example, there may be a need for more research to develop new research methods or to refine existing methods to address specific research questions.

4. Data gaps

These are gaps in the data available on a particular subject. For example, there may be a need for more research to collect data on a specific population or to develop new measures to collect data on a particular construct.

5. Practical gaps

These are gaps in the application of research findings to practical situations. For example, there may be a need for more research to understand how to implement evidence-based practices in real-world settings or to identify barriers to implementing such practices.

Examples of Research Gap

Limited understanding of the underlying mechanisms of a disease:.

Despite significant research on a particular disease, there may be a lack of understanding of the underlying mechanisms of the disease. For example, although much research has been done on Alzheimer’s disease, the exact mechanisms that lead to the disease are not yet fully understood.

Inconsistencies in the findings of previous research:

When previous research on a particular topic has inconsistent findings, there may be a need for further research to clarify or resolve these inconsistencies. For example, previous research on the effectiveness of a particular treatment for a medical condition may have produced inconsistent findings, indicating a need for further research to determine the true effectiveness of the treatment.

Limited research on emerging technologies:

As new technologies emerge, there may be limited research on their applications, benefits, and potential drawbacks. For example, with the increasing use of artificial intelligence in various industries, there is a need for further research on the ethical, legal, and social implications of AI.

How to Deal with Literature Gap?

Once you have identified the literature gaps, it is critical to prioritize. You may find many questions which remain to be answered in the literature. Often one question must be answered before the next can be addressed. In prioritizing the gaps, you have identified, you should consider your funding agency or stakeholders, the needs of the field, and the relevance of your questions to what is currently being studied. Also, consider your own resources and ability to conduct the research you’re considering. Once you have done this, you can narrow your search down to an appropriate question.

Tools to Help Your Search

There are thousands of new articles published every day, and staying up to date on the literature can be overwhelming. You should take advantage of the technology that is available. Some services include  PubCrawler ,  Feedly ,  Google Scholar , and PubMed updates. Stay up to date on social media forums where scholars share new discoveries, such as Twitter. Reference managers such as  Mendeley  can help you keep your references well-organized. I personally have had success using Google Scholar and PubMed to stay current on new developments and track which gaps remain in my personal areas of interest.

The most important thing I want to impress upon you today is that you will struggle to  choose a research topic  that is innovative and exciting if you don’t know the existing literature well. This is why identifying research gaps starts with an extensive and thorough  literature review . But give yourself some boundaries.  You don’t need to read every paper that has ever been written on a topic. You may find yourself thinking you’re on the right track and then suddenly coming across a paper that you had intended to write! It happens to everyone- it happens to me quite often. Don’t give up- keep reading and you’ll find what you’re looking for.

Class dismissed!

How do you identify research gaps? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

Frequently Asked Questions

A research gap can be identified by looking for a topic or area with missing or insufficient information that limits the ability to reach a conclusion for a question.

Identifying a research gap is important as it provides a direction for potentially new research or helps bridge the gap in existing literature.

Gap in research is a topic or area with missing or insufficient information. A research gap limits the ability to reach a conclusion for a question.

Thank u for your suggestion.

Very useful tips specially for a beginner

Thank you. This is helpful. I find that I’m overwhelmed with literatures. As I read on a particular topic, and in a particular direction I find that other conflicting issues, topic a and ideas keep popping up, making me more confused.

I am very grateful for your advice. It’s just on point.

The clearest, exhaustive, and brief explanation I have ever read.

Thanks for sharing

Thank you very much.The work is brief and understandable

Thank you it is very informative

Thanks for sharing this educative article

Thank you for such informative explanation.

Great job smart guy! Really outdid yourself!

Nice one! I thank you for this as it is just what I was looking for!😃🤟

Thank you so much for this. Much appreciated

Thank you so much.

Thankyou for ur briefing…its so helpful

Thank you so much .I’ved learn a lot from this.❤️

Very exciting and useful piece for researchers.

Your are awesome, it’s a great article.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Reporting Research

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for data interpretation

In research, choosing the right approach to understand data is crucial for deriving meaningful insights.…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right approach

The process of choosing the right research design can put ourselves at the crossroads of…

• Career Corner

Unlocking the Power of Networking in Academic Conferences

Embarking on your first academic conference experience? Fear not, we got you covered! Academic conferences…

Research Recommendations – Guiding policy-makers for evidence-based decision making

Research recommendations play a crucial role in guiding scholars and researchers toward fruitful avenues of…

• AI in Academia

Disclosing the Use of Generative AI: Best practices for authors in manuscript preparation

The rapid proliferation of generative and other AI-based tools in research writing has ignited an…

Avoiding the AI Trap: Pitfalls of relying on ChatGPT for PhD applications

10 Ways to Help Students Restore Focus on Learning

Switching Your Major As a Researcher: Things to Consider Before Making the Decision

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

• Industry News
• Publishing Research
• Promoting Research
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Infographics
• Expert Video Library
• Other Resources
• Enago Learn
• Upcoming & On-Demand Webinars
• Peer Review Week 2024
• Open Access Week 2023
• Conference Videos
• Enago Report
• Journal Finder
• Enago Plagiarism & AI Grammar Check
• Editing Services
• Publication Support Services
• Research Impact
• Translation Services
• Publication solutions
• AI-Based Solutions
• Thought Leadership
• Call for Articles
• Call for Speakers
• Author Training
• Edit Profile

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

In your opinion, what is the most effective way to improve integrity in the peer review process?

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

How to Identify a Research Gap

5-minute read

• 10th January 2024

If you’ve been tasked with producing a thesis or dissertation, one of your first steps will be identifying a research gap. Although finding a research gap may sound daunting, don’t fret! In this post, we will define a research gap, discuss its importance, and offer a step-by-step guide that will provide you with the essential know-how to complete this critical step and move on to the rest of your research project.

What Is a Research Gap?

Simply put, a research gap is an area that hasn’t been explored in the existing literature. This could be an unexplored population, an untested method, or a condition that hasn’t been investigated yet. 

Why Is Identifying a Research Gap Important?

Identifying a research gap is a foundational step in the research process. It ensures that your research is significant and has the ability to advance knowledge within a specific area. It also helps you align your work with the current needs and challenges of your field. Identifying a research gap has many potential benefits.

1. Avoid Redundancy in Your Research

Understanding the existing literature helps researchers avoid duplication. This means you can steer clear of topics that have already been extensively studied. This ensures your work is novel and contributes something new to the field.

2. Guide the Research Design

Identifying a research gap helps shape your research design and questions. You can tailor your studies to specifically address the identified gap. This ensures that your work directly contributes to filling the void in knowledge.

3. Practical Applications

Research that addresses a gap is more likely to have practical applications and contributions. Whether in academia, industry, or policymaking, research that fills a gap in knowledge is often more applicable and can inform decision-making and practices in real-world contexts.

4. Field Advancements

Addressing a research gap can lead to advancements in the field . It may result in the development of new theories, methodologies, or technologies that push the boundaries of current understanding.

5. Strategic Research Planning

Identifying a research gap is crucial for strategic planning . It helps researchers and institutions prioritize areas that need attention so they can allocate resources effectively. This ensures that efforts are directed toward the most critical gaps in knowledge.

6. Academic and Professional Recognition

Researchers who successfully address significant research gaps often receive peer recognition within their academic and professional communities. This recognition can lead to opportunities for collaboration, funding, and career advancement.

How Do I Identify a Research Gap?

1. clearly define your research topic .

Begin by clearly defining your research topic. A well-scoped topic serves as the foundation for your studies. Make sure it’s not too broad or too narrow; striking the right balance will make it easier to identify gaps in existing literature.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

2. Conduct a Thorough Literature Review

A comprehensive literature review is a vital step in any research. Dive deep into the existing research related to your topic. Look for patterns, recurring themes, and consensus among scholars. Pay attention to areas where conflicting opinions or gaps in understanding emerge.

3. Evaluate Existing Studies

Critically evaluate the studies you encounter during your literature review. Assess the paradigms , methodologies, findings, and limitations of each. Note any discrepancies, unanswered questions, or areas where further investigation is warranted. These are potential indicators of research gaps.

4. Identify Unexplored Perspectives

Consider the perspectives presented in the existing literature. Are there alternative viewpoints or marginalized voices that haven’t been adequately explored? Identifying and incorporating diverse perspectives can often lead to uncharted territory and help you pinpoint a unique research gap.

Additional Tips

Stay up to date with emerging trends.

The field of research is dynamic, with new developments and emerging trends constantly shaping the landscape. Stay up to date with the latest publications, conferences, and discussions in your field and make sure to regularly check relevant academic search engines . Often, identifying a research gap involves being at the forefront of current debates and discussions.

Seek Guidance From Experts

Don’t hesitate to reach out to experts in your field for guidance. Attend conferences, workshops, or seminars where you can interact with seasoned researchers. Their insights and experience can provide valuable perspectives on potential research gaps that you may have overlooked. You can also seek advice from your academic advisor .

Use Research Tools and Analytics

Leverage tech tools to analyze patterns and trends in the existing literature. Tools like citation analysis, keyword mapping, and data visualization can help you identify gaps and areas with limited exploration.

Identifying a research gap is a skill that evolves with experience and dedication. By defining your research topic, meticulously navigating the existing literature, critically evaluating studies, and recognizing unexplored perspectives, you’ll be on your way to identifying a research gap that will serve as the foundation for your paper, thesis, or dissertation topic .

If you need any help with proofreading your research paper , we can help with our research paper editing services . You can even try a sample of our services for free . Good luck with all your research!

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

Free email newsletter template (2024).

Promoting a brand means sharing valuable insights to connect more deeply with your audience, and...

6-minute read

How to Write a Nonprofit Grant Proposal

If you’re seeking funding to support your charitable endeavors as a nonprofit organization, you’ll need...

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

4-minute read

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

• Research Process
• Manuscript Preparation
• Manuscript Review
• Publication Process
• Publication Recognition
• Language Editing Services
• Translation Services

What is a Research Gap

• 3 minute read
• 293.7K views

Table of Contents

If you are a young researcher, or even still finishing your studies, you’ll probably notice that your academic environment revolves around certain research topics, probably linked to your department or to the interest of your mentor and direct colleagues. For example, if your department is currently doing research in nanotechnology applied to medicine, it is only natural that you feel compelled to follow this line of research. Hopefully, it’s something you feel familiar with and interested in – although you might take your own twists and turns along your career.

Many scientists end up continuing their academic legacy during their professional careers, writing about their own practical experiences in the field and adapting classic methodologies to a present context. However, each and every researcher dreams about being a pioneer in a subject one day, by discovering a topic that hasn’t been approached before by any other scientist. This is a research gap.

Research gaps are particularly useful for the advance of science, in general. Finding a research gap and having the means to develop a complete and sustained study on it can be very rewarding for the scientist (or team of scientists), not to mention how its new findings can positively impact our whole society.

How to Find a Gap in Research

How many times have you felt that you have finally formulated THAT new and exciting question, only to find out later that it had been addressed before? Probably more times than you can count.

There are some steps you can take to help identify research gaps, since it is impossible to go through all the information and research available nowadays:

• Select a topic or question that motivates you: Research can take a long time and surely a large amount of physical, intellectual and emotional effort, therefore choose a topic that can keep you motivated throughout the process.
• Find keywords and related terms to your selected topic: Besides synthesizing the topic to its essential core, this will help you in the next step.
• Use the identified keywords to search literature: From your findings in the above step, identify relevant publications and cited literature in those publications.
• Look for topics or issues that are missing or not addressed within (or related to) your main topic.
• Read systematic reviews: These documents plunge deeply into scholarly literature and identify trends and paradigm shifts in fields of study. Sometimes they reveal areas or topics that need more attention from researchers and scientists.

Keeping track of all the new literature being published every day is an impossible mission. Remember that there is technology to make your daily tasks easier, and reviewing literature can be one of them. Some online databases offer up-to-date publication lists with quite effective search features:

• Elsevier’s Scope
• Google Scholar

Of course, these tools may be more or less effective depending on knowledge fields. There might be even better ones for your specific topic of research; you can learn about them from more experienced colleagues or mentors.

Find out how FINER research framework can help you formulate your research question.

Literature Gap

The expression “literature gap” is used with the same intention as “research gap.” When there is a gap in the research itself, there will also naturally be a gap in the literature. Nevertheless, it is important to stress out the importance of language or text formulations that can help identify a research/literature gap or, on the other hand, making clear that a research gap is being addressed.

When looking for research gaps across publications you may have noticed sentences like:

…has/have not been… (studied/reported/elucidated) …is required/needed… …the key question is/remains… …it is important to address…

These expressions often indicate gaps; issues or topics related to the main question that still hasn’t been subject to a scientific study. Therefore, it is important to take notice of them: who knows if one of these sentences is hiding your way to fame.

Language Editing Services by Elsevier Author Services:

Systematic Review VS Meta-Analysis

Literature Review in Research Writing

You may also like.

Descriptive Research Design and Its Myriad Uses

Five Common Mistakes to Avoid When Writing a Biomedical Research Paper

Making Technical Writing in Environmental Engineering Accessible

To Err is Not Human: The Dangers of AI-assisted Academic Writing

When Data Speak, Listen: Importance of Data Collection and Analysis Methods

Choosing the Right Research Methodology: A Guide for Researchers

Why is data validation important in research?

Writing a good review article

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

How to identify research gaps

Anthony Newman

About this video

Researching is an ongoing task, as it requires you to think of something nobody else has thought of before. This is where the research gap comes into play.

We will explain what a research gap is, provide you with steps on how to identify these research gaps, as well as provide you several tools that can help you identify them.

About the presenter

Senior Publisher, Life Sciences, Elsevier

Anthony Newman is a Senior Publisher with Elsevier and is based in Amsterdam. Each year he presents numerous Author Workshops and other similar trainings worldwide. He is currently responsible for fifteen biochemistry and laboratory medicine journals, he joined Elsevier over thirty years ago and has been Publisher for more than twenty of those years. Before then he was the marketing communications manager for the biochemistry journals of Elsevier.  By training he is a polymer chemist and was active in the surface coating industry before leaving London and moving to Amsterdam in 1987 to join Elsevier.

Researcher Academy on Twitter

•   [email protected]
• Shapiro Library
• SNHU Library Frequently Asked Questions

FAQ: What is a research gap and how do I find one?

• 7 Academic Integrity & Plagiarism
• 61 Academic Support, Writing Help, & Presentation Help
• 28 Access/Remote Access
• 7 Accessibility
• 8 Building/Facilities
• 6 Career/Job Information
• 25 Catalog/Print Books
• 25 Circulation
• 134 Citing Sources
• 14 Copyright
• 306 Databases
• 23 Directions/Location
• 18 Faculty Resources/Needs
• 7 Hours/Contacts
• 2 Innovation Lab & Makerspace/3D Printing
• 25 Interlibrary Loan
• 43 IT/Computer/Printing Support
• 3 Library Instruction
• 37 Library Technology Help
• 6 Multimedia
• 16 Online Programs
• 20 Periodicals
• 24 Policies
• 8 RefWorks/Citation Managers
• 4 Research Guides (LibGuides)
• 213 Research Help
• 22 University Services

Last Updated: Aug 26, 2024 Views: 493379

What is a research gap.

A research gap is a question or a problem that has not been answered by any of the existing studies or research within your field. Sometimes, a research gap exists when there is a concept or new idea that hasn't been studied at all. Sometimes you'll find a research gap if all the existing research is outdated and in need of new/updated research (studies on Internet use in 2001, for example). Or, perhaps a specific population has not been well studied (perhaps there are plenty of studies on teenagers and video games, but not enough studies on toddlers and video games, for example). These are just a few examples, but any research gap you find is an area where more studies and more research need to be conducted. Please view this video clip from our Sage Research Methods database for more helpful information: How Do You Identify Gaps in Literature?

How do I find one?

It will take a lot of research and reading.  You'll need to be very familiar with all the studies that have already been done, and what those studies contributed to the overall body of knowledge about that topic. Make a list of any questions you have about your topic and then do some research to see if those questions have already been answered satisfactorily. If they haven't, perhaps you've discovered a gap!  Here are some strategies you can use to make the most of your time:

• One useful trick is to look at the “suggestions for future research” or conclusion section of existing studies on your topic. Many times, the authors will identify areas where they think a research gap exists, and what studies they think need to be done in the future.
• As you are researching, you will most likely come across citations for seminal works in your research field. These are the research studies that you see mentioned again and again in the literature.  In addition to finding those and reading them, you can use a database like Web of Science to follow the research trail and discover all the other articles that have cited these. See the FAQ: I found the perfect article for my paper. How do I find other articles and books that have cited it? on how to do this. One way to quickly track down these seminal works is to use a database like SAGE Navigator, a social sciences literature review tool. It is one of the products available via our SAGE Knowledge database.
• In the PsycINFO and PsycARTICLES databases, you can select literature review, systematic review, and meta analysis under the Methodology section in the advanced search to quickly locate these. See the FAQ: Where can I find a qualitative or quantitative study? for more information on how to find the Methodology section in these two databases.
• In CINAHL , you can select Systematic review under the Publication Type field in the advanced search. 
• In Web of Science , check the box beside Review under the Document Type heading in the “Refine Results” sidebar to the right of the list of search hits.
• If the database you are searching does not offer a way to filter your results by document type, publication type, or methodology in the advanced search, you can include these phrases (“literature reviews,” meta-analyses, or “systematic reviews”) in your search string.  For example, “video games” AND “literature reviews” could be a possible search that you could try.

Please give these suggestions a try and contact a librarian for additional assistance.

Content authored by: GS

• Share on Facebook

Was this helpful? Yes 398 No 155

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) are a self-serve option for users to search and find answers to their questions. 

Use the search box above to type your question to search for an answer or browse existing FAQs by group, topic, etc.

Tell Me More

Link to Question Form

More assistance.

Submit a Question

Related FAQs

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

How to Identify Gaps in Research: Tips to Speed Up the Process

If you have ever wondered how to identify research gaps, well, you’re not alone. All researchers looking to make a solid contribution to their field need to start by identifying a topic or issue that hasn’t been tackled before and coming up with possible solutions for it. This is where learning what is a research gap, knowing about some research gap examples, and knowing how to identify research gaps becomes important. Through this article, we will try answering these questions for you.

Table of Contents

What is a research gap ?  

Research gaps are areas requiring more studies or research. 1  They can be:   

• an unsolved question or problem within your field.   
• a case where inconclusive or contradictive results exist.   
• a new concept or idea that hasn’t been studied.   
• a new/updated research to replace the outdated existing research.   
• a specific demographic or location that has not been well studied.   

Why is it important to identify research gaps ?  

Identifying and prioritizing research gaps  is an essential part of any research for the following reasons. 2  This can help you:  

• ensure the rapid generation of subsequent research that is informed by input from previous research studies.    
• understand areas of uncertainty within the research problem.   
• establish the research problem and scope of the study.   
• determine the scope of funding opportunities.   

Identifying research gaps : A challenge for early researchers  

Coming up with original, innovative ideas in your chosen area of research can be tricky, especially if you are an early career researcher, for the following reasons: 3,4

• Enormous information available : The introduction, discussion, and future research sections in published research articles provide information about gaps in the research field. It is easy to get overwhelmed and feel confused about which one to address. Using digital tools can help you seek out popular topics or the most cited research papers.   
• Difficulty in organizing the data : One can quickly lose ideas if not appropriately noted. Mapping the question to the resource and maintaining a record can help narrow research gap s.  
• Fear of challenging the existing knowledge : Beginner researchers may not feel confident to question established norms in their field. A good plan of action would be discussing such ideas with your advisor and proceeding according to their feedback or suggestions.   
• Lack of direction and motivation : Early researchers have reported negative emotions regarding academic research, including feeling directionless or frustrated with the effort required in identifying research topics. Again a good advisor can help you stay focused. Mentors can help novice researchers avoid cases with a high risk of failure, from misunderstanding the literature, weak design, or too many unknowns. Talking with other fellow researchers can also help overcome some of the anxiety.

How to identify research gaps  in the literature  

More than 7 million papers get published annually. 5  Considering the volume of existing research, identifying research gaps  from existing literature may seem a daunting task. While there are no hard rules for identifying research gaps, the literature has provided some guidelines for identifying problems worth investigating.   

1. Observe : Personal interests and experiences can provide insight into possible research problems. For example, a researcher interested in teaching may start with a simple observation of students’ classroom behavior and observe the link with learning theories. Developing the habit of reading literature using smart apps like  R Discovery   can keep you updated with the latest trends and developments in the field.   

2. Search : Exploring existing literature will help to identify if the observed problem is documented. One approach is identifying the independent variables used to solve the researcher’s topic of interest (i.e., the dependent variable). Databases such as Emerald, ProQuest, EbscoHost, PubMed, and ScienceDirect can help potential researchers explore existing research gaps. The following steps can help with optimizing the search process once you decide on the key research question based on your interests.

-Identify key terms.

-Identify relevant articles based on the keywords.

-Review selected articles to identify gaps in the literature.  

3. Map : This involves mapping key issues or aspects across the literature. The map should be updated whenever a researcher comes across an article of interest.   

4. Synthesize : Synthesis involves integrating the insights of multiple but related studies. A research gap is identified by combining results and findings across several interrelated studies. 6

5. Consult:  Seeking expert feedback will help you understand if the  research gaps identified are adequate and feasible or if improvements are required.  

6. Prioritize : It is possible that you have identified multiple questions requiring answers. Prioritize the question that can be addressed first, considering their relevance, resource availability, and your research strengths.  

7. Enroll : Research Skills Development Programs, including workshops and discussion groups within or outside the research institution, can help develop research skills, such as framing the research problem. Networking and corroborating in such events with colleagues and experts might help you know more about current issues and problems in your research domain.   

While there is no well-defined process to identify gaps in knowledge, curiosity, judgment, and creativity can help you in identifying these research gaps . Regardless of whether the  research gaps identified are large or small, the study design must be sufficient to contribute toward advancing your field of research.    

References  

• Dissanayake, D. M. N. S. W. (2013). Research, research gap and the research problem.  
• Nyanchoka, L., Tudur-Smith, C., Porcher, R., & Hren, D. Key stakeholders’ perspectives and experiences with defining, identifying and displaying gaps in health research: a qualitative study.  BMJ open ,  10 (11), e039932 (2020).  
• Müller-Bloch, C., & Kranz, J. (2015). A framework for rigorously identifying research gaps in qualitative literature reviews.  
• Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017).  Designing and conducting mixed methods research . Sage publications.  
• Fire, M., & Guestrin, C. Over-optimization of academic publishing metrics: observing Goodhart’s Law in action.  GigaScience ,  8 (6), giz053 (2019).  
• Ellis, T. J., & Levy, Y. Framework of problem-based research: A guide for novice researchers on the development of a research-worthy problem.  Informing Science: the International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline Volume 11, 2008 ). 

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Question: How can research gaps be addressed?

Research gaps can be addressed by conducting further studies, experiments, or investigations that specifically target the areas where knowledge is lacking or incomplete. This involves conducting a thorough literature review to identify existing gaps, designing research methodologies to address these gaps, and collecting new data or analyzing existing data to fill the void. Collaboration among researchers, interdisciplinary approaches, and innovative research designs can also help bridge research gaps and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in a particular field.

Question: Can research gaps change over time?

Yes, research gaps can change over time. As new studies are conducted, technologies advance, and societal needs evolve, gaps in knowledge may be identified or existing gaps may become more pronounced. Research gaps are dynamic and subject to shifts as new discoveries are made, new questions arise, and priorities change. It is crucial for researchers to continuously assess and update their understanding of the field to identify emerging research gaps and adapt their research efforts accordingly.

Question: Are research gaps specific to a particular discipline or field?

Research gaps can exist within any discipline or field. Each discipline has its own unique body of knowledge and areas where understanding may be limited. Research gaps can arise from unanswered questions, unexplored phenomena, conflicting findings, practical challenges, or new frontiers of knowledge. They are not limited to a specific discipline or field, as gaps can exist in natural sciences, social sciences, humanities, engineering, or any other area of study.

Question: How can research gaps contribute to the research proposal?

Research gaps play a significant role in the development of research proposals. They help researchers identify a clear rationale and justification for their study. By addressing identified gaps in knowledge, researchers can demonstrate the significance and relevance of their proposed research. Research proposals often include a literature review section that highlights existing gaps and positions the proposed study as a contribution to the field. By explicitly addressing research gaps, researchers can strengthen the credibility and importance of their research proposal, as well as its potential impact on advancing knowledge and addressing critical questions or challenges.

R Discovery is a literature search and research reading platform that accelerates your research discovery journey by keeping you updated on the latest, most relevant scholarly content. With 250M+ research articles sourced from trusted aggregators like CrossRef, Unpaywall, PubMed, PubMed Central, Open Alex and top publishing houses like Springer Nature, JAMA, IOP, Taylor & Francis, NEJM, BMJ, Karger, SAGE, Emerald Publishing and more, R Discovery puts a world of research at your fingertips.  

Try R Discovery Prime FREE for 1 week or upgrade at just US$72 a year to access premium features that let you listen to research on the go, read in your language, collaborate with peers, auto sync with reference managers, and much more. Choose a simpler, smarter way to find and read research – Download the app and start your free 7-day trial today !  

Related Posts

Research in Shorts: R Discovery’s New Feature Helps Academics Assess Relevant Papers in 2mins 

How Does R Discovery’s Interplatform Capability Enhance Research Accessibility 

A Comprehensive Guide to Finding Research Gaps

 Identifying Research Gaps to Pursue Innovative Research

When scientists and researchers look for new things to study , they need to find out what’s missing in current knowledge. This missing piece is called a research gap. Finding a research gap is crucial because it helps researchers focus their efforts on areas that need more investigation. This can lead to new findings, better solutions, or even groundbreaking discoveries.

 How to Identify a Research Gap?

Identifying a research gap can be a bit like solving a mystery. here’s how you can go about it:.

• Read Lots of Studies: Start by reading existing research papers on your topic . Look for patterns, questions that haven’t been answered, or any areas where the research seems incomplete.
• Ask Questions: Think about questions that come to mind when you read these studies. What do you wonder about? What’s missing?
• Look at Recent Developments: Science and technology are always changing. Check out the latest studies to see if there are any new discoveries that haven’t been fully explored yet.
• Talk to Experts: Sometimes, talking to people who are already experts in your field can give you clues about where research is needed.
• Analyze Trends: Use tools like Google Scholar or research databases to find out which areas of research are being talked about the most and where there might be gaps.

 Different Types of Research Gaps

Research gaps can come in different forms. here’s a breakdown of some common types:.

• Knowledge Gaps: These are areas where there’s not enough information or understanding. For example, if scientists know a lot about how a disease works but don’t fully understand why it behaves in a certain way, that’s a knowledge gap.
• Conceptual Gaps: These occur when existing theories or models are not adequate. For instance, if current theories about a concept don’t fully explain recent observations, it indicates a conceptual gap.
• Methodological Gaps: These gaps arise when there’s a need for better methods or techniques. Maybe existing methods are outdated or not suitable for new types of research.
• Data Gaps: Sometimes, there isn’t enough data available on a topic. This could be due to a lack of studies, poor data collection methods, or incomplete datasets.
• Practical Gaps: These involve problems that are not addressed by existing research but are important in real-world situations. For example, research might be done in a lab setting but not in everyday conditions.

 Examples of Research Gaps

Here are some real-world examples to help you understand research gaps better:.

• Limited Understanding of the Underlying Mechanisms of a Disease: Researchers might know that a disease affects people in certain ways but don’t fully understand the underlying biological processes. This is a knowledge gap.
• Inconsistencies in the Findings of Previous Research: Sometimes, different studies on the same topic give conflicting results . This inconsistency points to a need for more research to clarify these differences.
• Limited Research on Emerging Technologies: New technologies often don’t have enough research behind them. For instance, while we might have a lot of information on traditional medical treatments , there may be fewer studies on new, experimental treatments.

 How to Deal with Literature Gap?

A literature gap is when there’s not enough research on a topic. here’s how you can deal with it:.

• Conduct Your Own Research: If you notice a literature gap, you might want to fill it by conducting your own research. This could mean doing experiments, surveys, or other studies to gather new data.
• Collaborate with Others: Work with other researchers to combine your knowledge and resources. Collaboration can help cover more ground and address gaps more effectively.
• Review and Update Existing Studies: Sometimes, updating and reviewing existing studies can help fill in gaps. This might involve synthesizing information from different sources to get a clearer picture.

 Tools to Help Your Search

Several tools can help you find and analyze research gaps:.

• Google Scholar: A free search engine for scholarly articles . It helps you find relevant research papers and track citations.
• PubMed: A database for medical and life sciences research. It’s useful for finding studies and reviews in these fields.
• ResearchGate: A network where researchers share their work. You can ask questions and get feedback from other experts.
• Bibliographic Software: Tools like EndNote or Zotero help manage your research references and organize your sources.

 Frequently Asked Questions

What if i can’t find a research gap.

Sometimes, gaps can be subtle or not immediately obvious. Keep exploring different topics, and consider discussing with mentors or colleagues who might offer new perspectives.

Can research gaps change over time?

Yes, as new research is conducted and technology advances, new gaps can appear, and existing gaps can be filled. It’s important to stay updated with the latest developments in your field.

How do I know if my research gap is important?

An important research gap is one that has significant implications for your field or has the potential to lead to new discoveries. Assess the impact of addressing the gap and consider its relevance to current issues.

Finding research gaps is an essential step in conducting meaningful and innovative research. By understanding and identifying these gaps, you can contribute to the advancement of knowledge and make a real difference in your field. So, start your adventure today and explore the exciting possibilities that lie in the unexplored areas of research!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• J Gen Intern Med
• v.37(1); 2022 Jan

Methods for Identifying Health Research Gaps, Needs, and Priorities: a Scoping Review

Eunice c. wong.

1 RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA USA

Alicia R. Maher

Aneesa motala.

2 Department of Population and Public Health Sciences, University of Southern California Gehr Family Center for Health Systems Science & Innovation, Los Angeles, USA

Rachel Ross

Olamigoke akinniranye, jody larkin, susanne hempel, associated data.

Well-defined, systematic, and transparent processes to identify health research gaps, needs, and priorities are vital to ensuring that available funds target areas with the greatest potential for impact.

The purpose of this review is to characterize methods conducted or supported by research funding organizations to identify health research gaps, needs, or priorities.

We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and the Web of Science up to September 2019. Eligible studies reported on methods to identify health research gaps, needs, and priorities that had been conducted or supported by research funding organizations. Using a published protocol, we extracted data on the method, criteria, involvement of stakeholders, evaluations, and whether the method had been replicated (i.e., used in other studies).

Among 10,832 citations, 167 studies were eligible for full data extraction. More than half of the studies employed methods to identify both needs and priorities, whereas about a quarter of studies focused singularly on identifying gaps (7%), needs (6%), or priorities (14%) only. The most frequently used methods were the convening of workshops or meetings (37%), quantitative methods (32%), and the James Lind Alliance approach, a multi-stakeholder research needs and priority setting process (28%). The most widely applied criteria were importance to stakeholders (72%), potential value (29%), and feasibility (18%). Stakeholder involvement was most prominent among clinicians (69%), researchers (66%), and patients and the public (59%). Stakeholders were identified through stakeholder organizations (51%) and purposive (26%) and convenience sampling (11%). Only 4% of studies evaluated the effectiveness of the methods and 37% employed methods that were reproducible and used in other studies.

To ensure optimal targeting of funds to meet the greatest areas of need and maximize outcomes, a much more robust evidence base is needed to ascertain the effectiveness of methods used to identify research gaps, needs, and priorities.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11606-021-07064-1.

Well-defined, systematic, and transparent methods to identify health research gaps, needs, and priorities are vital to ensuring that available funds target areas with the greatest potential for impact. 1 , 2 As defined in the literature, 3 , 4 research gaps are defined as areas or topics in which the ability to draw a conclusion for a given question is prevented by insufficient evidence. Research gaps are not necessarily synonymous with research needs , which are those knowledge gaps that significantly inhibit the decision-making ability of key stakeholders, who are end users of research, such as patients, clinicians, and policy makers. The selection of research priorities is often necessary when all identified research gaps or needs cannot be pursued because of resource constraints. Methods to identify health research gaps, needs, and priorities (from herein referred to as gaps, needs, priorities) can be multi-varied and there does not appear to be general consensus on best practices. 3 , 5

Several published reviews highlight the diverse methods that have been used to identify gaps and priorities. In a review of methods used to identify gaps from systematic reviews, Robinson et al. noted the wide range of organizing principles that were employed in published literature between 2001 and 2009 (e.g., care pathway, decision tree, and patient, intervention, comparison, outcome framework,). 6 In a more recent review spanning 2007 to 2017, Nyanchoka et al. found that the vast majority of studies with a primary focus on the identification of gaps (83%) relied solely on knowledge synthesis methods (e.g., systematic review, scoping review, evidence mapping, literature review). A much smaller proportion (9%) relied exclusively on primary research methods (i.e., quantitative survey, qualitative study). 7

With respect to research priorities, in a review limited to a PubMed database search covering the period from 2001 to 2014, Yoshida documented a wide range of methods to identify priorities including the use of not only knowledge synthesis (i.e., literature reviews) and primary research methods (i.e., surveys) but also multi-stage, structured methods such as Delphi, Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI), James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership (JLA PSP), and Essential National Health Research (ENHR). 2 The CHNRI method, originally developed for the purpose of setting global child health research priorities, typically employs researchers and experts to specify a long list of research questions, the criteria that will be used to prioritize research questions, and the technical scoring of research questions using the defined criteria. 8 During the latter stages, non-expert stakeholders’ input are incorporated by using their ratings of the importance of selected criteria to weight the technical scores. The ENHR method, initially designed for health research priority setting at the national level, involves researchers, decision-makers, health service providers, and communities throughout the entire process of identifying and prioritizing research topics. 9 The JLA PSP method convenes patients, carers, and clinicians to equally and jointly identify questions about healthcare that cannot be answered by existing evidence that are important to all groups (i.e., research needs). 10 The identified research needs are then prioritized by the groups resulting in a final list (often a top 10) of research priorities. Non-clinical researchers are excluded from voting on research needs or priorities but can be involved in other processes (e.g., knowledge synthesis). CHNRI, ENHR, and JLA PSP usually employ a mix of knowledge synthesis and primary research methods to first identify a set of gaps or needs that are then prioritized. Thus, even though CHNRI, ENHR, and JLA PSP have been referred to as priority setting methods, they actually consist of a gaps or needs identification stage that feeds into a research prioritization stage.

Nyanchoka et al.’s review found that the majority of studies focused on the identification of gaps alone (65%), whereas the remaining studies focused either on research priorities alone (17%) or on both gaps and priorities (19%). 7 In an update to Robinson et al.’s review, 6 Carey et al. reviewed the literature between 2010 and 2011 and observed that the studies conducted during this latter period of time focused more on research priorities than gaps and had increased stakeholder involvement, and that none had evaluated the reproducibility of the methods. 11

The increasing development and diversity of formal processes and methods to identify gaps and priorities are indicative of a developing field. 2 , 12 To facilitate more standardized and systematic processes, other important areas warrant further investigation. Prior reviews did not distinguish between the identification of gaps versus research needs. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-based Practice Center (AHRQ EPC) Program issued a series of method papers related to establishing research needs as part of comparative effectiveness research. 13 – 15 The AHRQ EPC Program defined research needs as “evidence gaps” identified within systematic reviews that are prioritized by stakeholders according to their potential impact on practice or care. 16 Furthermore, Nyanchoka et al. relied on author designations to classify studies as focusing on gaps versus research priorities and noted that definitions of gaps varied across studies, highlighting the need to apply consistent taxonomy when categorizing studies in reviews. 7 Given the rise in the use of stakeholders in both gaps and prioritization exercises, a greater understanding of the range of practices involving stakeholders is also needed. This includes the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders (e.g., consultants versus final decision-makers), the composition of stakeholders (e.g., non-research clinicians, patients, caregivers, policymakers), and the methods used to recruit stakeholders. The lack of consensus of best practices also highlights the importance of learning the extent to which evaluations to determine the effectiveness of gaps, needs, and prioritization exercises have been conducted, and if so, what were the resultant outcomes.

To better inform efforts and organizations that fund health research, we conducted a scoping review of methods used to identify gaps, needs, and priorities that were linked to potential or actual health research funding decision-making. Hence, this scoping review was limited to studies in which the identification of health research gaps, needs, or priorities was supported or conducted by funding organizations to address the following questions 1 : What are the characteristics of methods to identify health research gaps, needs, and priorities? and 2 To what extent have evaluations of the impact of these methods been conducted? Given that scoping reviews may be executed to characterize the ways an area of research has been conducted, 17 , 18 this approach is appropriate for the broad nature of this study’s aims.

Protocol and Registration

We employed methods that conform to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. 19 See Appendix A in the Supplementary Information. The scoping review protocol is registered with the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/5zjqx/ ).

Eligibility Criteria

Studies published in English that described methods to identify health research gaps, needs, or priorities that were supported or conducted by funding organizations were eligible for inclusion. We excluded studies that reported only the results of the exercise (e.g., list of priorities) absent of information on the methods used. We also excluded studies involving evidence synthesis (e.g., literature or systematic reviews) that were solely descriptive and did not employ an explicit method to identify research gaps, needs, or priorities.

Information Sources and Search Strategy

We searched the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. Our database search also included an update of the Nyanchoka et al. scoping review, which entailed executing their database searches for the time period following 2017 (the study’s search end date). 7 Nyanchoka et al. did not include database searches for research needs. The electronic database search and scoping review update were completed in August and September 2019, respectively . The search strategy employed for each of the databases is presented in Appendix B in the Supplementary Information.

Selection of Sources of Evidence and Data Charting Process

Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts and full-text publications. Citations that one or both reviewers considered potentially eligible were retrieved for full-text review. Relevant background articles and scoping and systematic reviews were reference mined to screen for eligible studies. Full-text publications were screened against detailed inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data was extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Discrepancies were resolved through discussion by the review team.

Information on study characteristics were extracted from each article including the aims of the exercise (i.e., gaps, needs, priorities, or a combination) and health condition (i.e., physical or psychological). Based on definitions in the literature, 3 – 5 the aims of the exercise were coded according to the activities that were conducted, which may not have always corresponded with the study authors’ labeling of the exercises. For instance, the JLA PSP method is often described as a priority exercise but we categorized it as a needs and priority exercise. Priority exercises can be preceded by exercises to identify gaps or needs, which then feed into the priority exercise such as in JLA PSP; however, standalone priority exercises can also be conducted (e.g., stakeholders prioritize an existing list of emerging diseases).

For each type of exercise, information on the methods were recorded. An initial list of methods was created based on previous reviews. 9 , 12 , 20 During the data extraction process, any methods not included in the initial list were subsequently added. If more than one exercise was reported within an article (e.g., gaps and priorities), information was extracted for each exercise separately. Reviewers extracted the following information: methods employed (e.g., qualitative, quantitative), criteria used (e.g., disease burden, importance to stakeholders), stakeholder involvement (e.g., stakeholder composition, method for identifying stakeholders), and whether an evaluation was conducted on the effectiveness of the exercise (see Appendix C in the Supplementary Information for full data extraction form).

Synthesis of results entailed quantitative descriptives of study characteristics (e.g., proportion of studies by aims of exercise) and characteristics of methods employed across all studies and by each type of study (e.g., gaps, needs, priorities).

The electronic database search yielded a total of 10,548 titles. Another 284 articles were identified after searching the reference lists of full-text publications, including three systematic reviews 21 – 23 and one scoping review 24 that had met eligibility criteria. Moreover, a total of 99 publications designated as relevant background articles were also reference mined to screen for eligible studies. We conducted full-text screening for 2524 articles, which resulted in 2344 exclusions (440 studies were designated as background articles). A total of 167 exercises related to the identification of gaps, needs, or priorities that were supported or conducted by a research funding organization were described across 180 publications and underwent full data extraction. See Figure ​ Figure1 1 for the flow diagram of our search strategy and reasons for exclusion.

Literature flow

Characteristics of Sources of Evidence

Among the published exercises, the majority of studies (152/167) conducted gaps, need, or prioritization exercises related to physical health, whereas only a small fraction of studies focused on psychological health (12/167) (see Appendix D in the Supplementary Information).

Methods for Identifying Gaps, Needs, and Priorities

As seen in Table ​ Table1, 1 , only about a quarter of studies involved a singular type of exercise with 7% focused on the identification of gaps only (i.e., areas with insufficient information to draw a conclusion for a given question), 6% on needs only (i.e., knowledge gaps that inhibit the decision-making of key stakeholders), and 14% priorities only (i.e., ranked gaps or needs often because of resource constraints). Studies more commonly conducted a combination of multiple types of exercises with more than half focused on the identification of both research needs and priorities, 14% on gaps and priorities, 3% gaps, needs, and priorities, and 3% gaps and needs.

Methods for Identifying Health Research Gaps, Needs, and Priorities

JLA PSP , James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnerships; ENHR , Essential National Health Research; CHNRI , Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative. Numbers in columns may add up to more than the total N or 100% since some studies employed more than one method

Across the 167 studies, the three most frequently used methods were the convening of workshops/meetings/conferences (37%), quantitative methods (32%), and the JLA PSP approach (28%). This was followed by methods involving literature reviews (17%), qualitative methods (17%), consensus methods (13%), and reviews of source materials (15%). Other methods included the CHNRI process (7%), reviews of in-progress data (7%), consultation with (non-researcher) stakeholders (4%), applying a framework tool (4%), ENHR (1%), systematic reviews (1%), and evidence mapping (1%).

The criterion most widely applied across the 167 studies was the importance to stakeholders (72%) (see Table ​ Table2). 2 ). Almost one-third (29%) considered the potential value and 18% feasibility as criteria. Burden of disease (9%), addressing inequities (8%), costs (6%), alignment with organization’s mission (3%), and patient centeredness (2%) were adopted as criteria to a lesser extent.

Criteria for Identifying Health Research Gaps, Needs, and Priorities

Numbers in columns may add up to more than the total N or 100% since some studies employed more than one criterion

About two-thirds of the studies included researchers (66%) and clinicians (69%) as stakeholders (see Appendix E in the Supplementary Information). Patients and the public were involved in 59% of the studies. A smaller proportion included policy makers (20%), funders (13%), product makers (8%), payers (5%), and purchasers (2%) as stakeholders. Nearly half of the studies (51%) relied on stakeholder organizations to identify stakeholders (see Appendix F in the Supplementary Information). A quarter of studies (26%) used purposive sampling and some convenience sampling (11%). Few (9%) used snowball sampling to identify stakeholders. Only a minor fraction of studies, seven of the 167 (4%), reported some type of effectiveness evaluation. 25 – 31

Our scoping review revealed that approaches to identifying gaps, needs, and priorities are less likely to occur as discrete processes and more often involve a combination of exercises. Approaches encompassing multiple exercises (e.g., gaps and needs) were far more prevalent than singular standalone exercises (e.g., gaps only) (73% vs. 27%). Findings underscore the varying importance placed on gaps, needs, and priorities, which reflect key principles of the Value of Information approach (i.e., not all gaps are important, addressing gaps do not necessarily address needs nor does addressing needs necessarily address priorities). 32

Findings differ from Nyanchoka et al.’s review in which studies involving the identification of gaps only outnumbered studies involving both gaps and priorities. 7 However, Nyanchoka et al. relied on author definitions to categorize exercises, whereas our study made designations based on our review of the activities described in the article and applied definitions drawn from the literature. 3 , 4 Lack of consensus on definitions of gaps and priority setting has been noted in the literature. 33 , 34 To the authors’ knowledge, no prior scoping review has focused on methods related to the identification of “research needs.” Findings underscore the need to develop and apply more consistent taxonomy to this growing field of research.

More than 40% of studies employed methods with a structured protocol including JLA PSP, ENHR, CHRNI, World Café, and the Dialogue model. 10 , 35 – 40 The World Café and Dialogue models particularly value the experiential perspectives of stakeholders. The World Café centers on creating a special environment, often modeled after a café, in which rounds of multi-stakeholder, small group, conversations are facilitated and prefaced with questions designed for the specific purpose of the session. Insights and results are reported and shared back to the entire group with no expectation to achieve consensus, but rather diverse perspectives are encouraged. 36 The Dialogue model is a multi-stakeholder, participatory, priority setting method involving the following phases: exploratory (informal discussions), consultation (separate stakeholder consultations), prioritization (stakeholder ratings), and integration (dialog between stakeholders). 39 Findings may indicate a trend away from non-replicable methods to approaches that afford greater transparency and reproducibility. 41 For instance, of the 17 studies published between 2000 and 2009, none had employed CHNRI and 6% used JLA PSP compared to the 141 studies between 2010 and 2019 in which 8% applied CHNRI and 32% JLA PSP. However, notable variations in implementing CHNRI and JLA PSP have been observed. 41 – 43 Though these protocols help to ensure a more standardized process, which is essential when testing the effectiveness of methods, such evaluations are infrequent but necessary to establish the usefulness of replicable methods.

Convening workshops, meetings, or conferences was the method used by the greatest proportion of studies (37%). The operationalization of even this singular method varied widely in duration (e.g., single vs. multi-day conferences), format (e.g., expert panel presentations, breakout discussion groups), processes (e.g., use of formal/informal consensus methods), and composition of stakeholders. The operationalization of other methods (e.g., quantitative, qualitative) also exhibited great diversity.

The use of explicit criteria to determine gaps, needs, or priorities is a key component of certain structured protocols 40 , 44 and frameworks. 9 , 45 In our scoping review, the criterion applied most frequently across studies (71%) was “importance to stakeholders” followed by potential value (31%) and feasibility (18%). Stakeholder values are being incorporated into the identification of gaps, needs, and exercises across a significant proportion of studies, but how this is operationalized varies widely across studies. For instance, the CHNRI typically employs multiple criteria that are scored by technical experts and these scores are then weighted based on stakeholder ratings of their relative importance. Other studies totaled scores across multiple criteria, whereas JLA PSP asks multiple stakeholders to rank the top ten priorities. The importance of involving stakeholders, especially patients and the public, in priority setting is increasingly viewed as vital to ensuring the needs of end users are met, 46 , 47 particularly in light of evidence demonstrating mismatches between the research interests of patients and researchers and clinicians. 48 – 50 In our review, clinicians (69%) and researchers (66%) were the most widely represented stakeholder groups across studies. Patients and the public (e.g., caregivers) were included as stakeholders in 59% of the studies. Only a small fraction of studies involved exercises in which stakeholders were limited to researchers only. Patients and the public were involved as stakeholders in 12% of studies published between 2000 and 2009 compared to 60% of studies between 2010 and 2019. Findings may reflect a trend away from researchers traditionally serving as one of the sole drivers of determining which research topics should be pursued.

More than half of the studies reported relying on stakeholder organizations to identify participants. Partnering with stakeholder organizations has been noted as one of the primary methods for identifying stakeholders for priority setting exercises. 34 Purposive sampling was the next most frequently used stakeholder identification method. In contrast, convenience sampling (e.g., recommendations by study team) and snowball sampling (e.g., identified stakeholders refer other stakeholders who then refer additional stakeholders) were not as frequently employed, but were documented as common methods in a prior review conducted almost a decade ago. 14 The greater use of stakeholder organizations than convenience or snowball sampling may be partly due to the more recent proliferation of published studies using structured protocols like JLA PSP, which rely heavily on partnerships with stakeholder organizations. Though methods such as snowball sampling may introduce more bias than random sampling, 14 there are no established best practices for stakeholder identification methods. 51 Nearly a quarter of studies provided either unclear or no information on stakeholder identification methods, which has been documented as a barrier to comparing across studies and assessing the validity of research priorities. 34

Determining the effectiveness of gaps, needs, and priority exercises is challenging given that outcome evaluations are rarely conducted. Only seven studies reported conducting an evaluation. 25 – 31 Evaluations varied with respect to their focus on process- (e.g., balanced stakeholder representation, stakeholder satisfaction) versus outcome-related impact (e.g., prioritized topics funded, knowledge production, benefits to health). There is no consensus on what constitutes optimal outcomes, which has been found to vary by discipline. 52

More than 90% of studies involved exercises related to physical health in contrast to a minor portfolio of work being dedicated to psychological health, which may be an indication of the low priority placed on psychological health policy research. Understanding whether funding decisions for physical versus psychological health research are similarly or differentially governed by more systematic, formal processes may be important to the extent that this affects the effective targeting of funds.

Limitations

By limiting studies to those supported or conducted by funding organizations, we may have excluded global, national, or local priority setting exercises. In addition, our scoping review categorized approaches according to the actual exercises conducted and definitions provided in the scientific literature rather than relying on the terminology employed by studies. This resulted in instances in which the category assigned to an exercise within our scoping review could diverge from the category employed by the study authors. Lastly, this study’s findings are subject to limitations often characteristic of scoping reviews such as publication bias, language bias, lack of quality assessment, and search, inclusion, and extraction biases. 53

Conclusions

The diversity and growing establishment of formal processes and methods to identify health research gaps, needs, and priorities are characteristic of a developing field. Even with the emergence of more structured and systematic approaches, the inconsistent categorization and definition of gaps, needs, and priorities inhibit efforts to evaluate the effectiveness of varied methods and processes, such efforts are rare and sorely needed to build an evidence base to guide best practices. The immense variation occurring within structured protocols, across different combinations of disparate methods, and even within singular methods, further emphasizes the importance of using clearly defined approaches, which are essential to conducting investigations of the effectiveness of these varied approaches. The recent development of reporting guidelines for priority setting for health research may facilitate more consistent and clear documentation of processes and methods, which includes the many facets of involving stakeholders. 34 To ensure optimal targeting of funds to meet the greatest areas of need and maximize outcomes, a much more robust evidence base is needed to ascertain the effectiveness of methods used to identify research gaps, needs, and priorities.

(PDF 1205 kb)

Acknowledgements

This scoping review is part of research that was sponsored by Defense Centers of Excellence for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury (now Psychological Health Center of Excellence).

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

What is a research gap, and how can I identify one?

Introduction

A research gap refers to an unexplored or underexplored area within a particular field of study where there is a lack of existing research or a limited understanding of a specific topic or issue. Identifying a research gap is crucial for conducting meaningful and impactful research, as it helps you contribute new knowledge to the field and address unanswered questions. Here’s how you can identify a research gap:

• Literature Review : Conduct a thorough literature review to understand the current state of research in your chosen field. Look for recent studies, reviews, articles, and books that relate to your topic. Pay attention to the conclusions and limitations of these existing works. You’re looking for areas where researchers have highlighted gaps or unanswered questions in the literature.
• Identify Contradictions or Inconsistencies : While reviewing the literature, you might come across conflicting findings, differing opinions, or gaps in the explanations provided by different studies. These inconsistencies can point to areas where further research is needed to reconcile conflicting viewpoints.
• Analyze Limitations : Examine the limitations of existing research. Are there specific aspects of the topic that haven’t been explored due to methodological, theoretical, or practical constraints? Identifying these limitations can reveal potential research gaps.
• Emerging Trends : Keep an eye on emerging trends, technologies, or changes in the field. New developments can create opportunities for research in areas that were previously unexplored.
• Practical Relevance : Consider the practical implications of the existing research. Are there gaps between theoretical knowledge and real-world applications? If certain aspects of the topic haven’t been applied or tested in practical settings, this could indicate a research gap.
• Unanswered Questions : Look for unanswered questions despite the existing body of research. These could be questions raised by researchers, or they might arise from your critical literature analysis.
• Changing Context : Sometimes, changes in societal, economic, technological, or political contexts can create new research gaps. These changes might render previously studied topics outdated or require a new perspective.
• Interdisciplinary Connections : Explore how your topic intersects with other disciplines. Sometimes, research gaps can be identified when looking at a topic from an interdisciplinary standpoint.
• Audience Perspective : Consider the perspective of the audience for your research. What would be valuable and interesting to them? What questions might they have that haven’t been adequately addressed in existing research?
• Personal Interest : Your own curiosity and interest can guide you toward potential research gaps. If you ask questions that haven’t been answered in the literature, these questions could lead to fruitful research endeavours.

Once you’ve identified a research gap, it’s important to clearly define it and articulate why addressing this gap is important for advancing the field. This will provide a strong foundation for your research proposal or project.

In the pursuit of advancing knowledge, identifying research gaps is essential. These unexplored niches within a field signify untapped opportunities for discovery and innovation. One can uncover contradictions, limitations, and unaddressed practical implications through comprehensive literature reviews. The evolving landscape of emerging trends and interdisciplinary connections further highlights the need for fresh investigations. By addressing unanswered questions, reconciling inconsistencies, and acknowledging changing contexts, researchers contribute to the growth of their respective domains. Embracing personal curiosity and considering the audience’s needs, researchers bridge the chasm between existing knowledge and the uncharted, ushering in new insights that enrich and shape the course of scholarly discourse.

Written by Dr. Nancy

Your Trusted Mentor

Text to speech

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Happiness Hub Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• Happiness Hub
• This Or That Game
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• College University and Postgraduate
• Academic Writing
• Research Papers

How to Find a Research Gap

Last Updated: February 16, 2024 Fact Checked

This article was reviewed by Gerald Posner and by wikiHow staff writer, Danielle Blinka, MA, MPA . Gerald Posner is an Author & Journalist based in Miami, Florida. With over 35 years of experience, he specializes in investigative journalism, nonfiction books, and editorials. He holds a law degree from UC College of the Law, San Francisco, and a BA in Political Science from the University of California-Berkeley. He’s the author of thirteen books, including several New York Times bestsellers, the winner of the Florida Book Award for General Nonfiction, and has been a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in History. He was also shortlisted for the Best Business Book of 2020 by the Society for Advancing Business Editing and Writing. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 34,888 times.

Do you want to contribute original research and make an impact in your field? If so, it's important to look for research gaps, or areas of study that are either under-researched or currently unexplored. In this article, we'll explain in detail the best way to identify a research gap—by performing a comprehensive literature review—so you can dive deep into your research topic and analyze articles critically and effectively. For more tips and tricks on identifying potential research gaps and how to proceed when you find one, read on.

Researching Your Topic

• If you start with a narrow topic, you may struggle to find a gap in research, since you’ll be focused on fewer avenues of study.
• For instance, a broad topic for social sciences research might be "organizational development" or "human motivation." For urban planning, a broad topic might be "walkable cities" or "traffic management."

• While you can't include sources like Wikipedia and news websites on your literature review, it's okay to read them to get an overview of your topic and recent developments in your field.
• It’s okay to narrow your topic as you learn more about it. However, keep your options open until you’re sure you’ve found an area with gaps in research.
• Let's say you were researching human motivation. You might use search terms like "motivating workers," "goal setting," and "improving worker productivity."

• Your research needs to be very thorough to ensure that you’re actually finding a gap. If you only read a handful of articles, you may be missing other existing research that answers your proposed research question.

Tip: Look for both quantitative and qualitative research, if applicable to your field. This will give you a broader overview of the current research.

• Ask them questions like, “Which areas of research are hot right now?” “What kinds of changes are happening within the field?” “What possible avenues of research do you see?” or “Do you think this topic is a good fit for me?”

Analyzing the Literature

• If you decide an article is unhelpful, it’s okay to skip the second reading.

Tip: Conducting a literature review is often a very time-consuming task. However, it’s also an essential part of identifying a research gap. Additionally, you can use the notes you take during your literature review when it comes time to write your article, thesis, or dissertation.

• As an example, an author might identify their gap in research with a statement like: “This subject has not been previously studied,” or “This question remains unanswered.”

• If you keep your notes in a separate document, make sure you label them with the title of the article and the author’s name. This way you won’t accidentally get your notes mixed up.

• Save any questions that you can’t answer because they may be a starting point for writing a research question.

• For instance, you might make a research gap table in a spreadsheet. Create 3 columns and label them “Author,” “Year,” and "Summary." For each article, list the authors, year of publication, and a bullet point summary of the article contents.
• Similarly, you may make a Venn diagram to compare 1 or more articles. Look for overlapping themes and methods, as well as differences between the articles.

Using Current Research, Key Concepts, or Trends

• Keep in mind that other researchers may have addressed the gaps identified in a particular article since that article was written. However, this can give you a starting point for finding a potential gap.

• Don’t rely solely on these types of papers when conducting your research. However, they can make a great supplement.

• Some journals will even tell you how many articles are pertaining to that key concept. If you see a key concept that has fewer articles than the others, that might be a good avenue for further research because it’s been studied less.

• You can access Google trends here: https://trends.google.com/trends/?geo=US
• For instance, if you look up "organizational development" on Google trends, you'll see that people are looking for information on management development, mission statements, and software framework.

Expert Q&A

• Reading Wikipedia articles related to your topic of study may help you identify a gap in research, though you can’t use those articles as sources. Look for areas where more citations are needed, unanswered questions, or sections that are underdeveloped.

You Might Also Like

• ↑ https://libanswers.snhu.edu/faq/264001
• ↑ https://resources.nu.edu/researchprocess/literaturegap
• ↑ https://guides.umd.umich.edu/c.php?g=529423&p=3621573
• ↑ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK62480/

About This Article

• Send fan mail to authors

Did this article help you?

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

Get all the best how-tos!

Sign up for wikiHow's weekly email newsletter

• Methodology
• Research Methodology
• Future Research

Research gaps for future research and their identification

• October 2022
• 16(1):575-579

• University of Nicosia
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• Qatrunnada Raqiqa

• Azel Raoul Reginald
• Supardi Supardi

• Safhina Rafa
• Annisa Fauziyah
• Mohammed Amine Benarbi

• Rafiqah Maulidiyah
• Muslim Salam

• E.T. Yuniarsih
• A. Nixia Tenriawaru
• Ragneel Chand

• INT J SERV IND MANAG

• Chatura Ranaweera

• Maria Simosi
• J CLIN EPIDEMIOL

• J BUS VENTURING

• Karen A Robinson

• Naomi A McKoy
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

We Trust in Human Precision

20,000+ Professional Language Experts Ready to Help. Expertise in a variety of Niches.

API Solutions

• API Pricing
• Cost estimate
• Customer loyalty program
• Educational Discount
• Non-Profit Discount
• Green Initiative Discount1

Value-Driven Pricing

Unmatched expertise at affordable rates tailored for your needs. Our services empower you to boost your productivity.

• Special Discounts
• Enterprise transcription solutions
• Enterprise translation solutions
• Transcription/Caption API
• AI Transcription Proofreading API

Trusted by Global Leaders

GoTranscript is the chosen service for top media organizations, universities, and Fortune 50 companies.

GoTranscript

One of the Largest Online Transcription and Translation Agencies in the World. Founded in 2005.

Speaker 1: After the title page and abstract, the reader's first true interaction with your research paper is the introduction. Your introduction will establish the foundation upon which your readers approach your work, and if you use the tips we discuss in this video, these readers should be able to logically apply the rules set in your introduction to all parts of your paper, all the way through the conclusion. What exactly is the purpose of the introduction? Think about your paper as a chronological story. It will begin at point A, the introduction, and move in time towards point B, the discussion and conclusion. Since your introduction includes content about the gaps in knowledge that your study aims to fill, the results you elaborate on in your discussion section should therefore be somewhat familiar to the reader, as you have already touched upon them in the introduction section. The introduction must answer two main questions. Why was this particular study needed to fill the gaps in knowledge? And why does this particular gap need filling? Imagine our entire plane of knowledge as an incomplete puzzle. The pieces snapped together are what is established, or what is known. The missing piece is the gap in knowledge, or what is currently unknown. This is what your study will be helping to explain. So the context you provide in the introduction must first identify that there is a knowledge gap in what it is, it must explain why it needs to be filled, and then briefly summarize how this study intends to fill that gap and why. The introduction is one of the most compact parts of the research paper, since it is not very long but needs to essentially give a complete overview of the context in which your study is taking place, and your specific reasons for doing the study. Most tend to be around 10% of the total length of your paper. The introduction consists of background information about a topic being studied, the rationale for undertaking the study, or for filling the gap with this particular information, key references to preliminary work or closely related papers appearing elsewhere, a clarification of important terms, definitions, or abbreviations to be used in the paper, and a review of related studies in which you give a brief but incisive analysis of work that heavily concerns your study. It could be a very similar study or one that supports the findings of your new study. So how should you structure your introduction? As you can see in this figure, your introduction should start broadly and then narrow until it reaches your hypothesis. The first thing you want to do is state your area of research and then immediately show what is already known. This is also known as background information. Then move on to what is unknown, the problem or gap you want to resolve. Finally, you should discuss how you will resolve this problem using a clear hypothesis. In step one, you will show what is already known. Start with a strong statement that reflects your research subject area and ask questions or post statements to frame the problems your study explores. You can ask general questions here to guide your readers to the problem and show them what we already know. For instance, what do we know about breathing capability of bottlenose dolphins? Use keywords from your title, the exact language of your study that is, to zero in on the problem at hand and show the relevance of your work. Avoid stating background information that is too broad in nature. You don't need to state too many obvious facts that your readers would know. If you are writing about bottlenose dolphins, for instance, you probably don't need to explain to them that mammals breathe oxygen. At the beginning of the introduction, you should also be sure to cite all of the sources that you use for background information and support. Only provide the necessary background information. Don't focus extensively on background, but use it to set up the context for doing this study. You should also review only relevant, up-to-date primary literature that supports your explanation of our current base of knowledge. In the second part of your introduction, you should answer the question, what is the knowledge gap? Here you will highlight areas where too little information is available. Explain how and why we should fill in that gap. What does this missing information do to impede our understanding of a process or system? And you should identify what logical next steps can be developed based on existing research. By showing you have examined current data and devised a method to find new applications and make new inferences, you're showing your peers that you are aware of the direction your research is moving in, and you're showing confidence in your decision to pursue this paper study. In the last part of your introduction, you will show how your study fills in the knowledge gap. This is where you state your purpose and give a clear hypothesis or objective of the study. The hypothesis is a very short 1-2 sentence supposition or explanation of what will happen in your study. This is quite often written as an if-then format. If X and Y are present, then Z will occur. Here you should also try to answer the question, if we fill this gap, what useful information will the readers gain? Many researchers have difficulty when it comes to deciding when to write their introduction. It is important to consider the order you draft your research paper, for as you recall, everything else in the research paper must flow from the introduction. Therefore, because it is one of the most difficult sections to nail down, consider writing the introduction second to last, after the materials and methods, results, and discussion section, and just before the conclusion. This will ensure you effectively lay a groundwork for the rest of your paper, and you can use the research you have already compiled to ensure that everything in your introduction is pertinent and accurate. In addition to content and organization, writers of research papers should also be aware of grammar and style issues that directly affect the readability and strength of their printed work. Here are some guidelines for writing the introduction section. Try and write in the active voice when possible. This will shorten your sentences and enhance the impact of your information. Always strive for concise sentences. This will allow you to get in all of the necessary information in this compact introduction section. Use stronger verbs when possible. This also impacts sentence length and strength of writing. Be careful not to overuse first-person pronouns such as I and we, and always organize your thoughts from the broad to the specific, as we have seen in our model. A strong introduction will encourage readers to read your entire research paper and help get your work published in scientific journals. For more information and tips on manuscript writing and journal submissions, visit the resources page at wordvice.com.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 31 August 2024

Knowledge mapping and evolution of research on older adults’ technology acceptance: a bibliometric study from 2013 to 2023

• Xianru Shang   ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0000-8906-3216 1 ,
• Zijian Liu 1 ,
• Chen Gong 1 ,
• Zhigang Hu 1 ,
• Yuexuan Wu 1 &
• Chengliang Wang   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2208-3508 2  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  1115 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

• Science, technology and society

The rapid expansion of information technology and the intensification of population aging are two prominent features of contemporary societal development. Investigating older adults’ acceptance and use of technology is key to facilitating their integration into an information-driven society. Given this context, the technology acceptance of older adults has emerged as a prioritized research topic, attracting widespread attention in the academic community. However, existing research remains fragmented and lacks a systematic framework. To address this gap, we employed bibliometric methods, utilizing the Web of Science Core Collection to conduct a comprehensive review of literature on older adults’ technology acceptance from 2013 to 2023. Utilizing VOSviewer and CiteSpace for data assessment and visualization, we created knowledge mappings of research on older adults’ technology acceptance. Our study employed multidimensional methods such as co-occurrence analysis, clustering, and burst analysis to: (1) reveal research dynamics, key journals, and domains in this field; (2) identify leading countries, their collaborative networks, and core research institutions and authors; (3) recognize the foundational knowledge system centered on theoretical model deepening, emerging technology applications, and research methods and evaluation, uncovering seminal literature and observing a shift from early theoretical and influential factor analyses to empirical studies focusing on individual factors and emerging technologies; (4) moreover, current research hotspots are primarily in the areas of factors influencing technology adoption, human-robot interaction experiences, mobile health management, and aging-in-place technology, highlighting the evolutionary context and quality distribution of research themes. Finally, we recommend that future research should deeply explore improvements in theoretical models, long-term usage, and user experience evaluation. Overall, this study presents a clear framework of existing research in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance, providing an important reference for future theoretical exploration and innovative applications.

Similar content being viewed by others

Research progress and intellectual structure of design for digital equity (DDE): A bibliometric analysis based on citespace

Exploring the role of interaction in older-adult service innovation: insights from the testing stage

Smart device interest, perceived usefulness, and preferences in rural Alabama seniors

Introduction.

In contemporary society, the rapid development of information technology has been intricately intertwined with the intensifying trend of population aging. According to the latest United Nations forecast, by 2050, the global population aged 65 and above is expected to reach 1.6 billion, representing about 16% of the total global population (UN 2023 ). Given the significant challenges of global aging, there is increasing evidence that emerging technologies have significant potential to maintain health and independence for older adults in their home and healthcare environments (Barnard et al. 2013 ; Soar 2010 ; Vancea and Solé-Casals 2016 ). This includes, but is not limited to, enhancing residential safety with smart home technologies (Touqeer et al. 2021 ; Wang et al. 2022 ), improving living independence through wearable technologies (Perez et al. 2023 ), and increasing medical accessibility via telehealth services (Kruse et al. 2020 ). Technological innovations are redefining the lifestyles of older adults, encouraging a shift from passive to active participation (González et al. 2012 ; Mostaghel 2016 ). Nevertheless, the effective application and dissemination of technology still depends on user acceptance and usage intentions (Naseri et al. 2023 ; Wang et al. 2023a ; Xia et al. 2024 ; Yu et al. 2023 ). Particularly, older adults face numerous challenges in accepting and using new technologies. These challenges include not only physical and cognitive limitations but also a lack of technological experience, along with the influences of social and economic factors (Valk et al. 2018 ; Wilson et al. 2021 ).

User acceptance of technology is a significant focus within information systems (IS) research (Dai et al. 2024 ), with several models developed to explain and predict user behavior towards technology usage, including the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis 1989 ), TAM2, TAM3, and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) (Venkatesh et al. 2003 ). Older adults, as a group with unique needs, exhibit different behavioral patterns during technology acceptance than other user groups, and these uniquenesses include changes in cognitive abilities, as well as motivations, attitudes, and perceptions of the use of new technologies (Chen and Chan 2011 ). The continual expansion of technology introduces considerable challenges for older adults, rendering the understanding of their technology acceptance a research priority. Thus, conducting in-depth research into older adults’ acceptance of technology is critically important for enhancing their integration into the information society and improving their quality of life through technological advancements.

Reviewing relevant literature to identify research gaps helps further solidify the theoretical foundation of the research topic. However, many existing literature reviews primarily focus on the factors influencing older adults’ acceptance or intentions to use technology. For instance, Ma et al. ( 2021 ) conducted a comprehensive analysis of the determinants of older adults’ behavioral intentions to use technology; Liu et al. ( 2022 ) categorized key variables in studies of older adults’ technology acceptance, noting a shift in focus towards social and emotional factors; Yap et al. ( 2022 ) identified seven categories of antecedents affecting older adults’ use of technology from an analysis of 26 articles, including technological, psychological, social, personal, cost, behavioral, and environmental factors; Schroeder et al. ( 2023 ) extracted 119 influencing factors from 59 articles and further categorized these into six themes covering demographics, health status, and emotional awareness. Additionally, some studies focus on the application of specific technologies, such as Ferguson et al. ( 2021 ), who explored barriers and facilitators to older adults using wearable devices for heart monitoring, and He et al. ( 2022 ) and Baer et al. ( 2022 ), who each conducted in-depth investigations into the acceptance of social assistive robots and mobile nutrition and fitness apps, respectively. In summary, current literature reviews on older adults’ technology acceptance exhibit certain limitations. Due to the interdisciplinary nature and complex knowledge structure of this field, traditional literature reviews often rely on qualitative analysis, based on literature analysis and periodic summaries, which lack sufficient objectivity and comprehensiveness. Additionally, systematic research is relatively limited, lacking a macroscopic description of the research trajectory from a holistic perspective. Over the past decade, research on older adults’ technology acceptance has experienced rapid growth, with a significant increase in literature, necessitating the adoption of new methods to review and examine the developmental trends in this field (Chen 2006 ; Van Eck and Waltman 2010 ). Bibliometric analysis, as an effective quantitative research method, analyzes published literature through visualization, offering a viable approach to extracting patterns and insights from a large volume of papers, and has been widely applied in numerous scientific research fields (Achuthan et al. 2023 ; Liu and Duffy 2023 ). Therefore, this study will employ bibliometric methods to systematically analyze research articles related to older adults’ technology acceptance published in the Web of Science Core Collection from 2013 to 2023, aiming to understand the core issues and evolutionary trends in the field, and to provide valuable references for future related research. Specifically, this study aims to explore and answer the following questions:

RQ1: What are the research dynamics in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance over the past decade? What are the main academic journals and fields that publish studies related to older adults’ technology acceptance?

RQ2: How is the productivity in older adults’ technology acceptance research distributed among countries, institutions, and authors?

RQ3: What are the knowledge base and seminal literature in older adults’ technology acceptance research? How has the research theme progressed?

RQ4: What are the current hot topics and their evolutionary trajectories in older adults’ technology acceptance research? How is the quality of research distributed?

Methodology and materials

Research method.

In recent years, bibliometrics has become one of the crucial methods for analyzing literature reviews and is widely used in disciplinary and industrial intelligence analysis (Jing et al. 2023 ; Lin and Yu 2024a ; Wang et al. 2024a ; Xu et al. 2021 ). Bibliometric software facilitates the visualization analysis of extensive literature data, intuitively displaying the network relationships and evolutionary processes between knowledge units, and revealing the underlying knowledge structure and potential information (Chen et al. 2024 ; López-Robles et al. 2018 ; Wang et al. 2024c ). This method provides new insights into the current status and trends of specific research areas, along with quantitative evidence, thereby enhancing the objectivity and scientific validity of the research conclusions (Chen et al. 2023 ; Geng et al. 2024 ). VOSviewer and CiteSpace are two widely used bibliometric software tools in academia (Pan et al. 2018 ), recognized for their robust functionalities based on the JAVA platform. Although each has its unique features, combining these two software tools effectively constructs mapping relationships between literature knowledge units and clearly displays the macrostructure of the knowledge domains. Particularly, VOSviewer, with its excellent graphical representation capabilities, serves as an ideal tool for handling large datasets and precisely identifying the focal points and hotspots of research topics. Therefore, this study utilizes VOSviewer (version 1.6.19) and CiteSpace (version 6.1.R6), combined with in-depth literature analysis, to comprehensively examine and interpret the research theme of older adults’ technology acceptance through an integrated application of quantitative and qualitative methods.

Data source

Web of Science is a comprehensively recognized database in academia, featuring literature that has undergone rigorous peer review and editorial scrutiny (Lin and Yu 2024b ; Mongeon and Paul-Hus 2016 ; Pranckutė 2021 ). This study utilizes the Web of Science Core Collection as its data source, specifically including three major citation indices: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), and Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI). These indices encompass high-quality research literature in the fields of science, social sciences, and arts and humanities, ensuring the comprehensiveness and reliability of the data. We combined “older adults” with “technology acceptance” through thematic search, with the specific search strategy being: TS = (elder OR elderly OR aging OR ageing OR senile OR senior OR old people OR “older adult*”) AND TS = (“technology acceptance” OR “user acceptance” OR “consumer acceptance”). The time span of literature search is from 2013 to 2023, with the types limited to “Article” and “Review” and the language to “English”. Additionally, the search was completed by October 27, 2023, to avoid data discrepancies caused by database updates. The initial search yielded 764 journal articles. Given that searches often retrieve articles that are superficially relevant but actually non-compliant, manual screening post-search was essential to ensure the relevance of the literature (Chen et al. 2024 ). Through manual screening, articles significantly deviating from the research theme were eliminated and rigorously reviewed. Ultimately, this study obtained 500 valid sample articles from the Web of Science Core Collection. The complete PRISMA screening process is illustrated in Fig. 1 .

Presentation of the data culling process in detail.

Data standardization

Raw data exported from databases often contain multiple expressions of the same terminology (Nguyen and Hallinger 2020 ). To ensure the accuracy and consistency of data, it is necessary to standardize the raw data (Strotmann and Zhao 2012 ). This study follows the data standardization process proposed by Taskin and Al ( 2019 ), mainly executing the following operations:

(1) Standardization of author and institution names is conducted to address different name expressions for the same author. For instance, “Chan, Alan Hoi Shou” and “Chan, Alan H. S.” are considered the same author, and distinct authors with the same name are differentiated by adding identifiers. Diverse forms of institutional names are unified to address variations caused by name changes or abbreviations, such as standardizing “FRANKFURT UNIV APPL SCI” and “Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences,” as well as “Chinese University of Hong Kong” and “University of Hong Kong” to consistent names.

(2) Different expressions of journal names are unified. For example, “International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction” and “Int J Hum Comput Interact” are standardized to a single name. This ensures consistency in journal names and prevents misclassification of literature due to differing journal names. Additionally, it involves checking if the journals have undergone name changes in the past decade to prevent any impact on the analysis due to such changes.

(3) Keywords data are cleansed by removing words that do not directly pertain to specific research content (e.g., people, review), merging synonyms (e.g., “UX” and “User Experience,” “aging-in-place” and “aging in place”), and standardizing plural forms of keywords (e.g., “assistive technologies” and “assistive technology,” “social robots” and “social robot”). This reduces redundant information in knowledge mapping.

Bibliometric results and analysis

Distribution power (rq1), literature descriptive statistical analysis.

Table 1 presents a detailed descriptive statistical overview of the literature in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance. After deduplication using the CiteSpace software, this study confirmed a valid sample size of 500 articles. Authored by 1839 researchers, the documents encompass 792 research institutions across 54 countries and are published in 217 different academic journals. As of the search cutoff date, these articles have accumulated 13,829 citations, with an annual average of 1156 citations, and an average of 27.66 citations per article. The h-index, a composite metric of quantity and quality of scientific output (Kamrani et al. 2021 ), reached 60 in this study.

Trends in publications and disciplinary distribution

The number of publications and citations are significant indicators of the research field’s development, reflecting its continuity, attention, and impact (Ale Ebrahim et al. 2014 ). The ranking of annual publications and citations in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance studies is presented chronologically in Fig. 2A . The figure shows a clear upward trend in the amount of literature in this field. Between 2013 and 2017, the number of publications increased slowly and decreased in 2018. However, in 2019, the number of publications increased rapidly to 52 and reached a peak of 108 in 2022, which is 6.75 times higher than in 2013. In 2022, the frequency of document citations reached its highest point with 3466 citations, reflecting the widespread recognition and citation of research in this field. Moreover, the curve of the annual number of publications fits a quadratic function, with a goodness-of-fit R 2 of 0.9661, indicating that the number of future publications is expected to increase even more rapidly.

A Trends in trends in annual publications and citations (2013–2023). B Overlay analysis of the distribution of discipline fields.

Figure 2B shows that research on older adults’ technology acceptance involves the integration of multidisciplinary knowledge. According to Web of Science Categories, these 500 articles are distributed across 85 different disciplines. We have tabulated the top ten disciplines by publication volume (Table 2 ), which include Medical Informatics (75 articles, 15.00%), Health Care Sciences & Services (71 articles, 14.20%), Gerontology (61 articles, 12.20%), Public Environmental & Occupational Health (57 articles, 11.40%), and Geriatrics & Gerontology (52 articles, 10.40%), among others. The high output in these disciplines reflects the concentrated global academic interest in this comprehensive research topic. Additionally, interdisciplinary research approaches provide diverse perspectives and a solid theoretical foundation for studies on older adults’ technology acceptance, also paving the way for new research directions.

Knowledge flow analysis

A dual-map overlay is a CiteSpace map superimposed on top of a base map, which shows the interrelationships between journals in different domains, representing the publication and citation activities in each domain (Chen and Leydesdorff 2014 ). The overlay map reveals the link between the citing domain (on the left side) and the cited domain (on the right side), reflecting the knowledge flow of the discipline at the journal level (Leydesdorff and Rafols 2012 ). We utilize the in-built Z-score algorithm of the software to cluster the graph, as shown in Fig. 3 .

The left side shows the citing journal, and the right side shows the cited journal.

Figure 3 shows the distribution of citing journals clusters for older adults’ technology acceptance on the left side, while the right side refers to the main cited journals clusters. Two knowledge flow citation trajectories were obtained; they are presented by the color of the cited regions, and the thickness of these trajectories is proportional to the Z-score scaled frequency of citations (Chen et al. 2014 ). Within the cited regions, the most popular fields with the most records covered are “HEALTH, NURSING, MEDICINE” and “PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATION, SOCIAL”, and the elliptical aspect ratio of these two fields stands out. Fields have prominent elliptical aspect ratios, highlighting their significant influence on older adults’ technology acceptance research. Additionally, the major citation trajectories originate in these two areas and progress to the frontier research area of “PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATION, HEALTH”. It is worth noting that the citation trajectory from “PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATION, SOCIAL” has a significant Z-value (z = 6.81), emphasizing the significance and impact of this development path. In the future, “MATHEMATICS, SYSTEMS, MATHEMATICAL”, “MOLECULAR, BIOLOGY, IMMUNOLOGY”, and “NEUROLOGY, SPORTS, OPHTHALMOLOGY” may become emerging fields. The fields of “MEDICINE, MEDICAL, CLINICAL” may be emerging areas of cutting-edge research.

Main research journals analysis

Table 3 provides statistics for the top ten journals by publication volume in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance. Together, these journals have published 137 articles, accounting for 27.40% of the total publications, indicating that there is no highly concentrated core group of journals in this field, with publications being relatively dispersed. Notably, Computers in Human Behavior , Journal of Medical Internet Research , and International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction each lead with 15 publications. In terms of citation metrics, International Journal of Medical Informatics and Computers in Human Behavior stand out significantly, with the former accumulating a total of 1,904 citations, averaging 211.56 citations per article, and the latter totaling 1,449 citations, with an average of 96.60 citations per article. These figures emphasize the academic authority and widespread impact of these journals within the research field.

Research power (RQ2)

Countries and collaborations analysis.

The analysis revealed the global research pattern for country distribution and collaboration (Chen et al. 2019 ). Figure 4A shows the network of national collaborations on older adults’ technology acceptance research. The size of the bubbles represents the amount of publications in each country, while the thickness of the connecting lines expresses the closeness of the collaboration among countries. Generally, this research subject has received extensive international attention, with China and the USA publishing far more than any other countries. China has established notable research collaborations with the USA, UK and Malaysia in this field, while other countries have collaborations, but the closeness is relatively low and scattered. Figure 4B shows the annual publication volume dynamics of the top ten countries in terms of total publications. Since 2017, China has consistently increased its annual publications, while the USA has remained relatively stable. In 2019, the volume of publications in each country increased significantly, this was largely due to the global outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has led to increased reliance on information technology among the elderly for medical consultations, online socialization, and health management (Sinha et al. 2021 ). This phenomenon has led to research advances in technology acceptance among older adults in various countries. Table 4 shows that the top ten countries account for 93.20% of the total cumulative number of publications, with each country having published more than 20 papers. Among these ten countries, all of them except China are developed countries, indicating that the research field of older adults’ technology acceptance has received general attention from developed countries. Currently, China and the USA were the leading countries in terms of publications with 111 and 104 respectively, accounting for 22.20% and 20.80%. The UK, Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands also made significant contributions. The USA and China ranked first and second in terms of the number of citations, while the Netherlands had the highest average citations, indicating the high impact and quality of its research. The UK has shown outstanding performance in international cooperation, while the USA highlights its significant academic influence in this field with the highest h-index value.

A National collaboration network. B Annual volume of publications in the top 10 countries.

Institutions and authors analysis

Analyzing the number of publications and citations can reveal an institution’s or author’s research strength and influence in a particular research area (Kwiek 2021 ). Tables 5 and 6 show the statistics of the institutions and authors whose publication counts are in the top ten, respectively. As shown in Table 5 , higher education institutions hold the main position in this research field. Among the top ten institutions, City University of Hong Kong and The University of Hong Kong from China lead with 14 and 9 publications, respectively. City University of Hong Kong has the highest h-index, highlighting its significant influence in the field. It is worth noting that Tilburg University in the Netherlands is not among the top five in terms of publications, but the high average citation count (130.14) of its literature demonstrates the high quality of its research.

After analyzing the authors’ output using Price’s Law (Redner 1998 ), the highest number of publications among the authors counted ( n  = 10) defines a publication threshold of 3 for core authors in this research area. As a result of quantitative screening, a total of 63 core authors were identified. Table 6 shows that Chen from Zhejiang University, China, Ziefle from RWTH Aachen University, Germany, and Rogers from Macquarie University, Australia, were the top three authors in terms of the number of publications, with 10, 9, and 8 articles, respectively. In terms of average citation rate, Peek and Wouters, both scholars from the Netherlands, have significantly higher rates than other scholars, with 183.2 and 152.67 respectively. This suggests that their research is of high quality and widely recognized. Additionally, Chen and Rogers have high h-indices in this field.

Knowledge base and theme progress (RQ3)

Research knowledge base.

Co-citation relationships occur when two documents are cited together (Zhang and Zhu 2022 ). Co-citation mapping uses references as nodes to represent the knowledge base of a subject area (Min et al. 2021). Figure 5A illustrates co-occurrence mapping in older adults’ technology acceptance research, where larger nodes signify higher co-citation frequencies. Co-citation cluster analysis can be used to explore knowledge structure and research boundaries (Hota et al. 2020 ; Shiau et al. 2023 ). The co-citation clustering mapping of older adults’ technology acceptance research literature (Fig. 5B ) shows that the Q value of the clustering result is 0.8129 (>0.3), and the average value of the weight S is 0.9391 (>0.7), indicating that the clusters are uniformly distributed with a significant and credible structure. This further proves that the boundaries of the research field are clear and there is significant differentiation in the field. The figure features 18 cluster labels, each associated with thematic color blocks corresponding to different time slices. Highlighted emerging research themes include #2 Smart Home Technology, #7 Social Live, and #10 Customer Service. Furthermore, the clustering labels extracted are primarily classified into three categories: theoretical model deepening, emerging technology applications, research methods and evaluation, as detailed in Table 7 .

A Co-citation analysis of references. B Clustering network analysis of references.

Seminal literature analysis

The top ten nodes in terms of co-citation frequency were selected for further analysis. Table 8 displays the corresponding node information. Studies were categorized into four main groups based on content analysis. (1) Research focusing on specific technology usage by older adults includes studies by Peek et al. ( 2014 ), Ma et al. ( 2016 ), Hoque and Sorwar ( 2017 ), and Li et al. ( 2019 ), who investigated the factors influencing the use of e-technology, smartphones, mHealth, and smart wearables, respectively. (2) Concerning the development of theoretical models of technology acceptance, Chen and Chan ( 2014 ) introduced the Senior Technology Acceptance Model (STAM), and Macedo ( 2017 ) analyzed the predictive power of UTAUT2 in explaining older adults’ intentional behaviors and information technology usage. (3) In exploring older adults’ information technology adoption and behavior, Lee and Coughlin ( 2015 ) emphasized that the adoption of technology by older adults is a multifactorial process that includes performance, price, value, usability, affordability, accessibility, technical support, social support, emotion, independence, experience, and confidence. Yusif et al. ( 2016 ) conducted a literature review examining the key barriers affecting older adults’ adoption of assistive technology, including factors such as privacy, trust, functionality/added value, cost, and stigma. (4) From the perspective of research into older adults’ technology acceptance, Mitzner et al. ( 2019 ) assessed the long-term usage of computer systems designed for the elderly, whereas Guner and Acarturk ( 2020 ) compared information technology usage and acceptance between older and younger adults. The breadth and prevalence of this literature make it a vital reference for researchers in the field, also providing new perspectives and inspiration for future research directions.

Research thematic progress

Burst citation is a node of literature that guides the sudden change in dosage, which usually represents a prominent development or major change in a particular field, with innovative and forward-looking qualities. By analyzing the emergent literature, it is often easy to understand the dynamics of the subject area, mapping the emerging thematic change (Chen et al. 2022 ). Figure 6 shows the burst citation mapping in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance research, with burst citations represented by red nodes (Fig. 6A ). For the ten papers with the highest burst intensity (Fig. 6B ), this study will conduct further analysis in conjunction with literature review.

A Burst detection of co-citation. B The top 10 references with the strongest citation bursts.

As shown in Fig. 6 , Mitzner et al. ( 2010 ) broke the stereotype that older adults are fearful of technology, found that they actually have positive attitudes toward technology, and emphasized the centrality of ease of use and usefulness in the process of technology acceptance. This finding provides an important foundation for subsequent research. During the same period, Wagner et al. ( 2010 ) conducted theory-deepening and applied research on technology acceptance among older adults. The research focused on older adults’ interactions with computers from the perspective of Social Cognitive Theory (SCT). This expanded the understanding of technology acceptance, particularly regarding the relationship between behavior, environment, and other SCT elements. In addition, Pan and Jordan-Marsh ( 2010 ) extended the TAM to examine the interactions among predictors of perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, subjective norm, and convenience conditions when older adults use the Internet, taking into account the moderating roles of gender and age. Heerink et al. ( 2010 ) adapted and extended the UTAUT, constructed a technology acceptance model specifically designed for older users’ acceptance of assistive social agents, and validated it using controlled experiments and longitudinal data, explaining intention to use by combining functional assessment and social interaction variables.

Then the research theme shifted to an in-depth analysis of the factors influencing technology acceptance among older adults. Two papers with high burst strengths emerged during this period: Peek et al. ( 2014 ) (Strength = 12.04), Chen and Chan ( 2014 ) (Strength = 9.81). Through a systematic literature review and empirical study, Peek STM and Chen K, among others, identified multidimensional factors that influence older adults’ technology acceptance. Peek et al. ( 2014 ) analyzed literature on the acceptance of in-home care technology among older adults and identified six factors that influence their acceptance: concerns about technology, expected benefits, technology needs, technology alternatives, social influences, and older adult characteristics, with a focus on differences between pre- and post-implementation factors. Chen and Chan ( 2014 ) constructed the STAM by administering a questionnaire to 1012 older adults and adding eight important factors, including technology anxiety, self-efficacy, cognitive ability, and physical function, based on the TAM. This enriches the theoretical foundation of the field. In addition, Braun ( 2013 ) highlighted the role of perceived usefulness, trust in social networks, and frequency of Internet use in older adults’ use of social networks, while ease of use and social pressure were not significant influences. These findings contribute to the study of older adults’ technology acceptance within specific technology application domains.

Recent research has focused on empirical studies of personal factors and emerging technologies. Ma et al. ( 2016 ) identified key personal factors affecting smartphone acceptance among older adults through structured questionnaires and face-to-face interviews with 120 participants. The study found that cost, self-satisfaction, and convenience were important factors influencing perceived usefulness and ease of use. This study offers empirical evidence to comprehend the main factors that drive smartphone acceptance among Chinese older adults. Additionally, Yusif et al. ( 2016 ) presented an overview of the obstacles that hinder older adults’ acceptance of assistive technologies, focusing on privacy, trust, and functionality.

In summary, research on older adults’ technology acceptance has shifted from early theoretical deepening and analysis of influencing factors to empirical studies in the areas of personal factors and emerging technologies, which have greatly enriched the theoretical basis of older adults’ technology acceptance and provided practical guidance for the design of emerging technology products.

Research hotspots, evolutionary trends, and quality distribution (RQ4)

Core keywords analysis.

Keywords concise the main idea and core of the literature, and are a refined summary of the research content (Huang et al. 2021 ). In CiteSpace, nodes with a centrality value greater than 0.1 are considered to be critical nodes. Analyzing keywords with high frequency and centrality helps to visualize the hot topics in the research field (Park et al. 2018 ). The merged keywords were imported into CiteSpace, and the top 10 keywords were counted and sorted by frequency and centrality respectively, as shown in Table 9 . The results show that the keyword “TAM” has the highest frequency (92), followed by “UTAUT” (24), which reflects that the in-depth study of the existing technology acceptance model and its theoretical expansion occupy a central position in research related to older adults’ technology acceptance. Furthermore, the terms ‘assistive technology’ and ‘virtual reality’ are both high-frequency and high-centrality terms (frequency = 17, centrality = 0.10), indicating that the research on assistive technology and virtual reality for older adults is the focus of current academic attention.

Research hotspots analysis

Using VOSviewer for keyword co-occurrence analysis organizes keywords into groups or clusters based on their intrinsic connections and frequencies, clearly highlighting the research field’s hot topics. The connectivity among keywords reveals correlations between different topics. To ensure accuracy, the analysis only considered the authors’ keywords. Subsequently, the keywords were filtered by setting the keyword frequency to 5 to obtain the keyword clustering map of the research on older adults’ technology acceptance research keyword clustering mapping (Fig. 7 ), combined with the keyword co-occurrence clustering network (Fig. 7A ) and the corresponding density situation (Fig. 7B ) to make a detailed analysis of the following four groups of clustered themes.

A Co-occurrence clustering network. B Keyword density.

Cluster #1—Research on the factors influencing technology adoption among older adults is a prominent topic, covering age, gender, self-efficacy, attitude, and and intention to use (Berkowsky et al. 2017 ; Wang et al. 2017 ). It also examined older adults’ attitudes towards and acceptance of digital health technologies (Ahmad and Mozelius, 2022 ). Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic, significantly impacting older adults’ technology attitudes and usage, has underscored the study’s importance and urgency. Therefore, it is crucial to conduct in-depth studies on how older adults accept, adopt, and effectively use new technologies, to address their needs and help them overcome the digital divide within digital inclusion. This will improve their quality of life and healthcare experiences.

Cluster #2—Research focuses on how older adults interact with assistive technologies, especially assistive robots and health monitoring devices, emphasizing trust, usability, and user experience as crucial factors (Halim et al. 2022 ). Moreover, health monitoring technologies effectively track and manage health issues common in older adults, like dementia and mild cognitive impairment (Lussier et al. 2018 ; Piau et al. 2019 ). Interactive exercise games and virtual reality have been deployed to encourage more physical and cognitive engagement among older adults (Campo-Prieto et al. 2021 ). Personalized and innovative technology significantly enhances older adults’ participation, improving their health and well-being.

Cluster #3—Optimizing health management for older adults using mobile technology. With the development of mobile health (mHealth) and health information technology, mobile applications, smartphones, and smart wearable devices have become effective tools to help older users better manage chronic conditions, conduct real-time health monitoring, and even receive telehealth services (Dupuis and Tsotsos 2018 ; Olmedo-Aguirre et al. 2022 ; Kim et al. 2014 ). Additionally, these technologies can mitigate the problem of healthcare resource inequality, especially in developing countries. Older adults’ acceptance and use of these technologies are significantly influenced by their behavioral intentions, motivational factors, and self-management skills. These internal motivational factors, along with external factors, jointly affect older adults’ performance in health management and quality of life.

Cluster #4—Research on technology-assisted home care for older adults is gaining popularity. Environmentally assisted living enhances older adults’ independence and comfort at home, offering essential support and security. This has a crucial impact on promoting healthy aging (Friesen et al. 2016 ; Wahlroos et al. 2023 ). The smart home is a core application in this field, providing a range of solutions that facilitate independent living for the elderly in a highly integrated and user-friendly manner. This fulfills different dimensions of living and health needs (Majumder et al. 2017 ). Moreover, eHealth offers accurate and personalized health management and healthcare services for older adults (Delmastro et al. 2018 ), ensuring their needs are met at home. Research in this field often employs qualitative methods and structural equation modeling to fully understand older adults’ needs and experiences at home and analyze factors influencing technology adoption.

Evolutionary trends analysis

To gain a deeper understanding of the evolutionary trends in research hotspots within the field of older adults’ technology acceptance, we conducted a statistical analysis of the average appearance times of keywords, using CiteSpace to generate the time-zone evolution mapping (Fig. 8 ) and burst keywords. The time-zone mapping visually displays the evolution of keywords over time, intuitively reflecting the frequency and initial appearance of keywords in research, commonly used to identify trends in research topics (Jing et al. 2024a ; Kumar et al. 2021 ). Table 10 lists the top 15 keywords by burst strength, with the red sections indicating high-frequency citations and their burst strength in specific years. These burst keywords reveal the focus and trends of research themes over different periods (Kleinberg 2002 ). Combining insights from the time-zone mapping and burst keywords provides more objective and accurate research insights (Wang et al. 2023b ).

Reflecting the frequency and time of first appearance of keywords in the study.

An integrated analysis of Fig. 8 and Table 10 shows that early research on older adults’ technology acceptance primarily focused on factors such as perceived usefulness, ease of use, and attitudes towards information technology, including their use of computers and the internet (Pan and Jordan-Marsh 2010 ), as well as differences in technology use between older adults and other age groups (Guner and Acarturk 2020 ). Subsequently, the research focus expanded to improving the quality of life for older adults, exploring how technology can optimize health management and enhance the possibility of independent living, emphasizing the significant role of technology in improving the quality of life for the elderly. With ongoing technological advancements, recent research has shifted towards areas such as “virtual reality,” “telehealth,” and “human-robot interaction,” with a focus on the user experience of older adults (Halim et al. 2022 ). The appearance of keywords such as “physical activity” and “exercise” highlights the value of technology in promoting physical activity and health among older adults. This phase of research tends to make cutting-edge technology genuinely serve the practical needs of older adults, achieving its widespread application in daily life. Additionally, research has focused on expanding and quantifying theoretical models of older adults’ technology acceptance, involving keywords such as “perceived risk”, “validation” and “UTAUT”.

In summary, from 2013 to 2023, the field of older adults’ technology acceptance has evolved from initial explorations of influencing factors, to comprehensive enhancements in quality of life and health management, and further to the application and deepening of theoretical models and cutting-edge technologies. This research not only reflects the diversity and complexity of the field but also demonstrates a comprehensive and in-depth understanding of older adults’ interactions with technology across various life scenarios and needs.

Research quality distribution

To reveal the distribution of research quality in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance, a strategic diagram analysis is employed to calculate and illustrate the internal development and interrelationships among various research themes (Xie et al. 2020 ). The strategic diagram uses Centrality as the X-axis and Density as the Y-axis to divide into four quadrants, where the X-axis represents the strength of the connection between thematic clusters and other themes, with higher values indicating a central position in the research field; the Y-axis indicates the level of development within the thematic clusters, with higher values denoting a more mature and widely recognized field (Li and Zhou 2020 ).

Through cluster analysis and manual verification, this study categorized 61 core keywords (Frequency ≥5) into 11 thematic clusters. Subsequently, based on the keywords covered by each thematic cluster, the research themes and their directions for each cluster were summarized (Table 11 ), and the centrality and density coordinates for each cluster were precisely calculated (Table 12 ). Finally, a strategic diagram of the older adults’ technology acceptance research field was constructed (Fig. 9 ). Based on the distribution of thematic clusters across the quadrants in the strategic diagram, the structure and developmental trends of the field were interpreted.

Classification and visualization of theme clusters based on density and centrality.

As illustrated in Fig. 9 , (1) the theme clusters of #3 Usage Experience and #4 Assisted Living Technology are in the first quadrant, characterized by high centrality and density. Their internal cohesion and close links with other themes indicate their mature development, systematic research content or directions have been formed, and they have a significant influence on other themes. These themes play a central role in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance and have promising prospects. (2) The theme clusters of #6 Smart Devices, #9 Theoretical Models, and #10 Mobile Health Applications are in the second quadrant, with higher density but lower centrality. These themes have strong internal connections but weaker external links, indicating that these three themes have received widespread attention from researchers and have been the subject of related research, but more as self-contained systems and exhibit independence. Therefore, future research should further explore in-depth cooperation and cross-application with other themes. (3) The theme clusters of #7 Human-Robot Interaction, #8 Characteristics of the Elderly, and #11 Research Methods are in the third quadrant, with lower centrality and density. These themes are loosely connected internally and have weak links with others, indicating their developmental immaturity. Compared to other topics, they belong to the lower attention edge and niche themes, and there is a need for further investigation. (4) The theme clusters of #1 Digital Healthcare Technology, #2 Psychological Factors, and #5 Socio-Cultural Factors are located in the fourth quadrant, with high centrality but low density. Although closely associated with other research themes, the internal cohesion within these clusters is relatively weak. This suggests that while these themes are closely linked to other research areas, their own development remains underdeveloped, indicating a core immaturity. Nevertheless, these themes are crucial within the research domain of elderly technology acceptance and possess significant potential for future exploration.

Discussion on distribution power (RQ1)

Over the past decade, academic interest and influence in the area of older adults’ technology acceptance have significantly increased. This trend is evidenced by a quantitative analysis of publication and citation volumes, particularly noticeable in 2019 and 2022, where there was a substantial rise in both metrics. The rise is closely linked to the widespread adoption of emerging technologies such as smart homes, wearable devices, and telemedicine among older adults. While these technologies have enhanced their quality of life, they also pose numerous challenges, sparking extensive research into their acceptance, usage behaviors, and influencing factors among the older adults (Pirzada et al. 2022 ; Garcia Reyes et al. 2023 ). Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic led to a surge in technology demand among older adults, especially in areas like medical consultation, online socialization, and health management, further highlighting the importance and challenges of technology. Health risks and social isolation have compelled older adults to rely on technology for daily activities, accelerating its adoption and application within this demographic. This phenomenon has made technology acceptance a critical issue, driving societal and academic focus on the study of technology acceptance among older adults.

The flow of knowledge at the level of high-output disciplines and journals, along with the primary publishing outlets, indicates the highly interdisciplinary nature of research into older adults’ technology acceptance. This reflects the complexity and breadth of issues related to older adults’ technology acceptance, necessitating the integration of multidisciplinary knowledge and approaches. Currently, research is primarily focused on medical health and human-computer interaction, demonstrating academic interest in improving health and quality of life for older adults and addressing the urgent needs related to their interactions with technology. In the field of medical health, research aims to provide advanced and innovative healthcare technologies and services to meet the challenges of an aging population while improving the quality of life for older adults (Abdi et al. 2020 ; Wilson et al. 2021 ). In the field of human-computer interaction, research is focused on developing smarter and more user-friendly interaction models to meet the needs of older adults in the digital age, enabling them to actively participate in social activities and enjoy a higher quality of life (Sayago, 2019 ). These studies are crucial for addressing the challenges faced by aging societies, providing increased support and opportunities for the health, welfare, and social participation of older adults.

Discussion on research power (RQ2)

This study analyzes leading countries and collaboration networks, core institutions and authors, revealing the global research landscape and distribution of research strength in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance, and presents quantitative data on global research trends. From the analysis of country distribution and collaborations, China and the USA hold dominant positions in this field, with developed countries like the UK, Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands also excelling in international cooperation and research influence. The significant investment in technological research and the focus on the technological needs of older adults by many developed countries reflect their rapidly aging societies, policy support, and resource allocation.

China is the only developing country that has become a major contributor in this field, indicating its growing research capabilities and high priority given to aging societies and technological innovation. Additionally, China has close collaborations with countries such as USA, the UK, and Malaysia, driven not only by technological research needs but also by shared challenges and complementarities in aging issues among these nations. For instance, the UK has extensive experience in social welfare and aging research, providing valuable theoretical guidance and practical experience. International collaborations, aimed at addressing the challenges of aging, integrate the strengths of various countries, advancing in-depth and widespread development in the research of technology acceptance among older adults.

At the institutional and author level, City University of Hong Kong leads in publication volume, with research teams led by Chan and Chen demonstrating significant academic activity and contributions. Their research primarily focuses on older adults’ acceptance and usage behaviors of various technologies, including smartphones, smart wearables, and social robots (Chen et al. 2015 ; Li et al. 2019 ; Ma et al. 2016 ). These studies, targeting specific needs and product characteristics of older adults, have developed new models of technology acceptance based on existing frameworks, enhancing the integration of these technologies into their daily lives and laying a foundation for further advancements in the field. Although Tilburg University has a smaller publication output, it holds significant influence in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance. Particularly, the high citation rate of Peek’s studies highlights their excellence in research. Peek extensively explored older adults’ acceptance and usage of home care technologies, revealing the complexity and dynamics of their technology use behaviors. His research spans from identifying systemic influencing factors (Peek et al. 2014 ; Peek et al. 2016 ), emphasizing familial impacts (Luijkx et al. 2015 ), to constructing comprehensive models (Peek et al. 2017 ), and examining the dynamics of long-term usage (Peek et al. 2019 ), fully reflecting the evolving technology landscape and the changing needs of older adults. Additionally, the ongoing contributions of researchers like Ziefle, Rogers, and Wouters in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance demonstrate their research influence and leadership. These researchers have significantly enriched the knowledge base in this area with their diverse perspectives. For instance, Ziefle has uncovered the complex attitudes of older adults towards technology usage, especially the trade-offs between privacy and security, and how different types of activities affect their privacy needs (Maidhof et al. 2023 ; Mujirishvili et al. 2023 ; Schomakers and Ziefle 2023 ; Wilkowska et al. 2022 ), reflecting a deep exploration and ongoing innovation in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance.

Discussion on knowledge base and thematic progress (RQ3)

Through co-citation analysis and systematic review of seminal literature, this study reveals the knowledge foundation and thematic progress in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance. Co-citation networks and cluster analyses illustrate the structural themes of the research, delineating the differentiation and boundaries within this field. Additionally, burst detection analysis offers a valuable perspective for understanding the thematic evolution in the field of technology acceptance among older adults. The development and innovation of theoretical models are foundational to this research. Researchers enhance the explanatory power of constructed models by deepening and expanding existing technology acceptance theories to address theoretical limitations. For instance, Heerink et al. ( 2010 ) modified and expanded the UTAUT model by integrating functional assessment and social interaction variables to create the almere model. This model significantly enhances the ability to explain the intentions of older users in utilizing assistive social agents and improves the explanation of actual usage behaviors. Additionally, Chen and Chan ( 2014 ) extended the TAM to include age-related health and capability features of older adults, creating the STAM, which substantially improves predictions of older adults’ technology usage behaviors. Personal attributes, health and capability features, and facilitating conditions have a direct impact on technology acceptance. These factors more effectively predict older adults’ technology usage behaviors than traditional attitudinal factors.

With the advancement of technology and the application of emerging technologies, new research topics have emerged, increasingly focusing on older adults’ acceptance and use of these technologies. Prior to this, the study by Mitzner et al. ( 2010 ) challenged the stereotype of older adults’ conservative attitudes towards technology, highlighting the central roles of usability and usefulness in the technology acceptance process. This discovery laid an important foundation for subsequent research. Research fields such as “smart home technology,” “social life,” and “customer service” are emerging, indicating a shift in focus towards the practical and social applications of technology in older adults’ lives. Research not only focuses on the technology itself but also on how these technologies integrate into older adults’ daily lives and how they can improve the quality of life through technology. For instance, studies such as those by Ma et al. ( 2016 ), Hoque and Sorwar ( 2017 ), and Li et al. ( 2019 ) have explored factors influencing older adults’ use of smartphones, mHealth, and smart wearable devices.

Furthermore, the diversification of research methodologies and innovation in evaluation techniques, such as the use of mixed methods, structural equation modeling (SEM), and neural network (NN) approaches, have enhanced the rigor and reliability of the findings, enabling more precise identification of the factors and mechanisms influencing technology acceptance. Talukder et al. ( 2020 ) employed an effective multimethodological strategy by integrating SEM and NN to leverage the complementary strengths of both approaches, thus overcoming their individual limitations and more accurately analyzing and predicting older adults’ acceptance of wearable health technologies (WHT). SEM is utilized to assess the determinants’ impact on the adoption of WHT, while neural network models validate SEM outcomes and predict the significance of key determinants. This combined approach not only boosts the models’ reliability and explanatory power but also provides a nuanced understanding of the motivations and barriers behind older adults’ acceptance of WHT, offering deep research insights.

Overall, co-citation analysis of the literature in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance has uncovered deeper theoretical modeling and empirical studies on emerging technologies, while emphasizing the importance of research methodological and evaluation innovations in understanding complex social science issues. These findings are crucial for guiding the design and marketing strategies of future technology products, especially in the rapidly growing market of older adults.

Discussion on research hotspots and evolutionary trends (RQ4)

By analyzing core keywords, we can gain deep insights into the hot topics, evolutionary trends, and quality distribution of research in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance. The frequent occurrence of the keywords “TAM” and “UTAUT” indicates that the applicability and theoretical extension of existing technology acceptance models among older adults remain a focal point in academia. This phenomenon underscores the enduring influence of the studies by Davis ( 1989 ) and Venkatesh et al. ( 2003 ), whose models provide a robust theoretical framework for explaining and predicting older adults’ acceptance and usage of emerging technologies. With the widespread application of artificial intelligence (AI) and big data technologies, these theoretical models have incorporated new variables such as perceived risk, trust, and privacy issues (Amin et al. 2024 ; Chen et al. 2024 ; Jing et al. 2024b ; Seibert et al. 2021 ; Wang et al. 2024b ), advancing the theoretical depth and empirical research in this field.

Keyword co-occurrence cluster analysis has revealed multiple research hotspots in the field, including factors influencing technology adoption, interactive experiences between older adults and assistive technologies, the application of mobile health technology in health management, and technology-assisted home care. These studies primarily focus on enhancing the quality of life and health management of older adults through emerging technologies, particularly in the areas of ambient assisted living, smart health monitoring, and intelligent medical care. In these domains, the role of AI technology is increasingly significant (Qian et al. 2021 ; Ho 2020 ). With the evolution of next-generation information technologies, AI is increasingly integrated into elder care systems, offering intelligent, efficient, and personalized service solutions by analyzing the lifestyles and health conditions of older adults. This integration aims to enhance older adults’ quality of life in aspects such as health monitoring and alerts, rehabilitation assistance, daily health management, and emotional support (Lee et al. 2023 ). A survey indicates that 83% of older adults prefer AI-driven solutions when selecting smart products, demonstrating the increasing acceptance of AI in elder care (Zhao and Li 2024 ). Integrating AI into elder care presents both opportunities and challenges, particularly in terms of user acceptance, trust, and long-term usage effects, which warrant further exploration (Mhlanga 2023 ). These studies will help better understand the profound impact of AI technology on the lifestyles of older adults and provide critical references for optimizing AI-driven elder care services.

The Time-zone evolution mapping and burst keyword analysis further reveal the evolutionary trends of research hotspots. Early studies focused on basic technology acceptance models and user perceptions, later expanding to include quality of life and health management. In recent years, research has increasingly focused on cutting-edge technologies such as virtual reality, telehealth, and human-robot interaction, with a concurrent emphasis on the user experience of older adults. This evolutionary process demonstrates a deepening shift from theoretical models to practical applications, underscoring the significant role of technology in enhancing the quality of life for older adults. Furthermore, the strategic coordinate mapping analysis clearly demonstrates the development and mutual influence of different research themes. High centrality and density in the themes of Usage Experience and Assisted Living Technology indicate their mature research status and significant impact on other themes. The themes of Smart Devices, Theoretical Models, and Mobile Health Applications demonstrate self-contained research trends. The themes of Human-Robot Interaction, Characteristics of the Elderly, and Research Methods are not yet mature, but they hold potential for development. Themes of Digital Healthcare Technology, Psychological Factors, and Socio-Cultural Factors are closely related to other themes, displaying core immaturity but significant potential.

In summary, the research hotspots in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance are diverse and dynamic, demonstrating the academic community’s profound understanding of how older adults interact with technology across various life contexts and needs. Under the influence of AI and big data, research should continue to focus on the application of emerging technologies among older adults, exploring in depth how they adapt to and effectively use these technologies. This not only enhances the quality of life and healthcare experiences for older adults but also drives ongoing innovation and development in this field.

Research agenda

Based on the above research findings, to further understand and promote technology acceptance and usage among older adults, we recommend future studies focus on refining theoretical models, exploring long-term usage, and assessing user experience in the following detailed aspects:

Refinement and validation of specific technology acceptance models for older adults: Future research should focus on developing and validating technology acceptance models based on individual characteristics, particularly considering variations in technology acceptance among older adults across different educational levels and cultural backgrounds. This includes factors such as age, gender, educational background, and cultural differences. Additionally, research should examine how well specific technologies, such as wearable devices and mobile health applications, meet the needs of older adults. Building on existing theoretical models, this research should integrate insights from multiple disciplines such as psychology, sociology, design, and engineering through interdisciplinary collaboration to create more accurate and comprehensive models, which should then be validated in relevant contexts.

Deepening the exploration of the relationship between long-term technology use and quality of life among older adults: The acceptance and use of technology by users is a complex and dynamic process (Seuwou et al. 2016 ). Existing research predominantly focuses on older adults’ initial acceptance or short-term use of new technologies; however, the impact of long-term use on their quality of life and health is more significant. Future research should focus on the evolution of older adults’ experiences and needs during long-term technology usage, and the enduring effects of technology on their social interactions, mental health, and life satisfaction. Through longitudinal studies and qualitative analysis, this research reveals the specific needs and challenges of older adults in long-term technology use, providing a basis for developing technologies and strategies that better meet their requirements. This understanding aids in comprehensively assessing the impact of technology on older adults’ quality of life and guiding the optimization and improvement of technological products.

Evaluating the Importance of User Experience in Research on Older Adults’ Technology Acceptance: Understanding the mechanisms of information technology acceptance and use is central to human-computer interaction research. Although technology acceptance models and user experience models differ in objectives, they share many potential intersections. Technology acceptance research focuses on structured prediction and assessment, while user experience research concentrates on interpreting design impacts and new frameworks. Integrating user experience to assess older adults’ acceptance of technology products and systems is crucial (Codfrey et al. 2022 ; Wang et al. 2019 ), particularly for older users, where specific product designs should emphasize practicality and usability (Fisk et al. 2020 ). Researchers need to explore innovative age-appropriate design methods to enhance older adults’ usage experience. This includes studying older users’ actual usage preferences and behaviors, optimizing user interfaces, and interaction designs. Integrating feedback from older adults to tailor products to their needs can further promote their acceptance and continued use of technology products.

Conclusions

This study conducted a systematic review of the literature on older adults’ technology acceptance over the past decade through bibliometric analysis, focusing on the distribution power, research power, knowledge base and theme progress, research hotspots, evolutionary trends, and quality distribution. Using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods, this study has reached the following conclusions:

Technology acceptance among older adults has become a hot topic in the international academic community, involving the integration of knowledge across multiple disciplines, including Medical Informatics, Health Care Sciences Services, and Ergonomics. In terms of journals, “PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATION, HEALTH” represents a leading field, with key publications including Computers in Human Behavior , Journal of Medical Internet Research , and International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction . These journals possess significant academic authority and extensive influence in the field.

Research on technology acceptance among older adults is particularly active in developed countries, with China and USA publishing significantly more than other nations. The Netherlands leads in high average citation rates, indicating the depth and impact of its research. Meanwhile, the UK stands out in terms of international collaboration. At the institutional level, City University of Hong Kong and The University of Hong Kong in China are in leading positions. Tilburg University in the Netherlands demonstrates exceptional research quality through its high average citation count. At the author level, Chen from China has the highest number of publications, while Peek from the Netherlands has the highest average citation count.

Co-citation analysis of references indicates that the knowledge base in this field is divided into three main categories: theoretical model deepening, emerging technology applications, and research methods and evaluation. Seminal literature focuses on four areas: specific technology use by older adults, expansion of theoretical models of technology acceptance, information technology adoption behavior, and research perspectives. Research themes have evolved from initial theoretical deepening and analysis of influencing factors to empirical studies on individual factors and emerging technologies.

Keyword analysis indicates that TAM and UTAUT are the most frequently occurring terms, while “assistive technology” and “virtual reality” are focal points with high frequency and centrality. Keyword clustering analysis reveals that research hotspots are concentrated on the influencing factors of technology adoption, human-robot interaction experiences, mobile health management, and technology for aging in place. Time-zone evolution mapping and burst keyword analysis have revealed the research evolution from preliminary exploration of influencing factors, to enhancements in quality of life and health management, and onto advanced technology applications and deepening of theoretical models. Furthermore, analysis of research quality distribution indicates that Usage Experience and Assisted Living Technology have become core topics, while Smart Devices, Theoretical Models, and Mobile Health Applications point towards future research directions.

Through this study, we have systematically reviewed the dynamics, core issues, and evolutionary trends in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance, constructing a comprehensive Knowledge Mapping of the domain and presenting a clear framework of existing research. This not only lays the foundation for subsequent theoretical discussions and innovative applications in the field but also provides an important reference for relevant scholars.

Limitations

To our knowledge, this is the first bibliometric analysis concerning technology acceptance among older adults, and we adhered strictly to bibliometric standards throughout our research. However, this study relies on the Web of Science Core Collection, and while its authority and breadth are widely recognized, this choice may have missed relevant literature published in other significant databases such as PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar, potentially overlooking some critical academic contributions. Moreover, given that our analysis was confined to literature in English, it may not reflect studies published in other languages, somewhat limiting the global representativeness of our data sample.

It is noteworthy that with the rapid development of AI technology, its increasingly widespread application in elderly care services is significantly transforming traditional care models. AI is profoundly altering the lifestyles of the elderly, from health monitoring and smart diagnostics to intelligent home systems and personalized care, significantly enhancing their quality of life and health care standards. The potential for AI technology within the elderly population is immense, and research in this area is rapidly expanding. However, due to the restrictive nature of the search terms used in this study, it did not fully cover research in this critical area, particularly in addressing key issues such as trust, privacy, and ethics.

Consequently, future research should not only expand data sources, incorporating multilingual and multidatabase literature, but also particularly focus on exploring older adults’ acceptance of AI technology and its applications, in order to construct a more comprehensive academic landscape of older adults’ technology acceptance, thereby enriching and extending the knowledge system and academic trends in this field.

Data availability

The datasets analyzed during the current study are available in the Dataverse repository: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/6K0GJH .

Abdi S, de Witte L, Hawley M (2020) Emerging technologies with potential care and support applications for older people: review of gray literature. JMIR Aging 3(2):e17286. https://doi.org/10.2196/17286

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Achuthan K, Nair VK, Kowalski R, Ramanathan S, Raman R (2023) Cyberbullying research—Alignment to sustainable development and impact of COVID-19: Bibliometrics and science mapping analysis. Comput Human Behav 140:107566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107566

Article   Google Scholar  

Ahmad A, Mozelius P (2022) Human-Computer Interaction for Older Adults: a Literature Review on Technology Acceptance of eHealth Systems. J Eng Res Sci 1(4):119–126. https://doi.org/10.55708/js0104014

Ale Ebrahim N, Salehi H, Embi MA, Habibi F, Gholizadeh H, Motahar SM (2014) Visibility and citation impact. Int Educ Stud 7(4):120–125. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v7n4p120

Amin MS, Johnson VL, Prybutok V, Koh CE (2024) An investigation into factors affecting the willingness to disclose personal health information when using AI-enabled caregiver robots. Ind Manag Data Syst 124(4):1677–1699. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-09-2023-0608

Baer NR, Vietzke J, Schenk L (2022) Middle-aged and older adults’ acceptance of mobile nutrition and fitness apps: a systematic mixed studies review. PLoS One 17(12):e0278879. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0278879

Barnard Y, Bradley MD, Hodgson F, Lloyd AD (2013) Learning to use new technologies by older adults: Perceived difficulties, experimentation behaviour and usability. Comput Human Behav 29(4):1715–1724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.006

Berkowsky RW, Sharit J, Czaja SJ (2017) Factors predicting decisions about technology adoption among older adults. Innov Aging 3(1):igy002. https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igy002

Braun MT (2013) Obstacles to social networking website use among older adults. Comput Human Behav 29(3):673–680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.004

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Campo-Prieto P, Rodríguez-Fuentes G, Cancela-Carral JM (2021) Immersive virtual reality exergame promotes the practice of physical activity in older people: An opportunity during COVID-19. Multimodal Technol Interact 5(9):52. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti5090052

Chen C (2006) CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 57(3):359–377. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20317

Chen C, Dubin R, Kim MC (2014) Emerging trends and new developments in regenerative medicine: a scientometric update (2000–2014). Expert Opin Biol Ther 14(9):1295–1317. https://doi.org/10.1517/14712598.2014.920813

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Chen C, Leydesdorff L (2014) Patterns of connections and movements in dual‐map overlays: A new method of publication portfolio analysis. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol 65(2):334–351. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22968

Chen J, Wang C, Tang Y (2022) Knowledge mapping of volunteer motivation: A bibliometric analysis and cross-cultural comparative study. Front Psychol 13:883150. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.883150

Chen JY, Liu YD, Dai J, Wang CL (2023) Development and status of moral education research: Visual analysis based on knowledge graph. Front Psychol 13:1079955. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1079955

Chen K, Chan AH (2011) A review of technology acceptance by older adults. Gerontechnology 10(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.4017/gt.2011.10.01.006.00

Chen K, Chan AH (2014) Gerontechnology acceptance by elderly Hong Kong Chinese: a senior technology acceptance model (STAM). Ergonomics 57(5):635–652. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2014.895855

Chen K, Zhang Y, Fu X (2019) International research collaboration: An emerging domain of innovation studies? Res Policy 48(1):149–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.005

Chen X, Hu Z, Wang C (2024) Empowering education development through AIGC: A systematic literature review. Educ Inf Technol 1–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12549-7

Chen Y, Chen CM, Liu ZY, Hu ZG, Wang XW (2015) The methodology function of CiteSpace mapping knowledge domains. Stud Sci Sci 33(2):242–253. https://doi.org/10.16192/j.cnki.1003-2053.2015.02.009

Codfrey GS, Baharum A, Zain NHM, Omar M, Deris FD (2022) User Experience in Product Design and Development: Perspectives and Strategies. Math Stat Eng Appl 71(2):257–262. https://doi.org/10.17762/msea.v71i2.83

Dai J, Zhang X, Wang CL (2024) A meta-analysis of learners’ continuance intention toward online education platforms. Educ Inf Technol 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12654-7

Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q 13(3):319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

Delmastro F, Dolciotti C, Palumbo F, Magrini M, Di Martino F, La Rosa D, Barcaro U (2018) Long-term care: how to improve the quality of life with mobile and e-health services. In 2018 14th International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications (WiMob), pp. 12–19. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/WiMOB.2018.8589157

Dupuis K, Tsotsos LE (2018) Technology for remote health monitoring in an older population: a role for mobile devices. Multimodal Technol Interact 2(3):43. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti2030043

Ferguson C, Hickman LD, Turkmani S, Breen P, Gargiulo G, Inglis SC (2021) Wearables only work on patients that wear them”: Barriers and facilitators to the adoption of wearable cardiac monitoring technologies. Cardiovasc Digit Health J 2(2):137–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cvdhj.2021.02.001

Fisk AD, Czaja SJ, Rogers WA, Charness N, Sharit J (2020) Designing for older adults: Principles and creative human factors approaches. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420080681

Friesen S, Brémault-Phillips S, Rudrum L, Rogers LG (2016) Environmental design that supports healthy aging: Evaluating a new supportive living facility. J Hous Elderly 30(1):18–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763893.2015.1129380

Garcia Reyes EP, Kelly R, Buchanan G, Waycott J (2023) Understanding Older Adults’ Experiences With Technologies for Health Self-management: Interview Study. JMIR Aging 6:e43197. https://doi.org/10.2196/43197

Geng Z, Wang J, Liu J, Miao J (2024) Bibliometric analysis of the development, current status, and trends in adult degenerative scoliosis research: A systematic review from 1998 to 2023. J Pain Res 17:153–169. https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S437575

González A, Ramírez MP, Viadel V (2012) Attitudes of the elderly toward information and communications technologies. Educ Gerontol 38(9):585–594. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601277.2011.595314

Guner H, Acarturk C (2020) The use and acceptance of ICT by senior citizens: a comparison of technology acceptance model (TAM) for elderly and young adults. Univ Access Inf Soc 19(2):311–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-018-0642-4

Halim I, Saptari A, Perumal PA, Abdullah Z, Abdullah S, Muhammad MN (2022) A Review on Usability and User Experience of Assistive Social Robots for Older Persons. Int J Integr Eng 14(6):102–124. https://penerbit.uthm.edu.my/ojs/index.php/ijie/article/view/8566

He Y, He Q, Liu Q (2022) Technology acceptance in socially assistive robots: Scoping review of models, measurement, and influencing factors. J Healthc Eng 2022(1):6334732. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6334732

Heerink M, Kröse B, Evers V, Wielinga B (2010) Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: the almere model. Int J Soc Robot 2:361–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-010-0068-5

Ho A (2020) Are we ready for artificial intelligence health monitoring in elder care? BMC Geriatr 20(1):358. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-020-01764-9

Hoque R, Sorwar G (2017) Understanding factors influencing the adoption of mHealth by the elderly: An extension of the UTAUT model. Int J Med Inform 101:75–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.02.002

Hota PK, Subramanian B, Narayanamurthy G (2020) Mapping the intellectual structure of social entrepreneurship research: A citation/co-citation analysis. J Bus Ethics 166(1):89–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04129-4

Huang R, Yan P, Yang X (2021) Knowledge map visualization of technology hotspots and development trends in China’s textile manufacturing industry. IET Collab Intell Manuf 3(3):243–251. https://doi.org/10.1049/cim2.12024

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Jing Y, Wang C, Chen Y, Wang H, Yu T, Shadiev R (2023) Bibliometric mapping techniques in educational technology research: A systematic literature review. Educ Inf Technol 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12178-6

Jing YH, Wang CL, Chen ZY, Shen SS, Shadiev R (2024a) A Bibliometric Analysis of Studies on Technology-Supported Learning Environments: Hotopics and Frontier Evolution. J Comput Assist Learn 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12934

Jing YH, Wang HM, Chen XJ, Wang CL (2024b) What factors will affect the effectiveness of using ChatGPT to solve programming problems? A quasi-experimental study. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11:319. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02751-w

Kamrani P, Dorsch I, Stock WG (2021) Do researchers know what the h-index is? And how do they estimate its importance? Scientometrics 126(7):5489–5508. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03968-1

Kim HS, Lee KH, Kim H, Kim JH (2014) Using mobile phones in healthcare management for the elderly. Maturitas 79(4):381–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2014.08.013

Article   MathSciNet   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Kleinberg J (2002) Bursty and hierarchical structure in streams. In Proceedings of the eighth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pp. 91–101. https://doi.org/10.1145/775047.775061

Kruse C, Fohn J, Wilson N, Patlan EN, Zipp S, Mileski M (2020) Utilization barriers and medical outcomes commensurate with the use of telehealth among older adults: systematic review. JMIR Med Inform 8(8):e20359. https://doi.org/10.2196/20359

Kumar S, Lim WM, Pandey N, Christopher Westland J (2021) 20 years of electronic commerce research. Electron Commer Res 21:1–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-021-09464-1

Kwiek M (2021) What large-scale publication and citation data tell us about international research collaboration in Europe: Changing national patterns in global contexts. Stud High Educ 46(12):2629–2649. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1749254

Lee C, Coughlin JF (2015) PERSPECTIVE: Older adults’ adoption of technology: an integrated approach to identifying determinants and barriers. J Prod Innov Manag 32(5):747–759. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12176

Lee CH, Wang C, Fan X, Li F, Chen CH (2023) Artificial intelligence-enabled digital transformation in elderly healthcare field: scoping review. Adv Eng Inform 55:101874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2023.101874

Leydesdorff L, Rafols I (2012) Interactive overlays: A new method for generating global journal maps from Web-of-Science data. J Informetr 6(2):318–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.11.003

Li J, Ma Q, Chan AH, Man S (2019) Health monitoring through wearable technologies for older adults: Smart wearables acceptance model. Appl Ergon 75:162–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2018.10.006

Article   ADS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Li X, Zhou D (2020) Product design requirement information visualization approach for intelligent manufacturing services. China Mech Eng 31(07):871, http://www.cmemo.org.cn/EN/Y2020/V31/I07/871

Google Scholar  

Lin Y, Yu Z (2024a) An integrated bibliometric analysis and systematic review modelling students’ technostress in higher education. Behav Inf Technol 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2024.2332458

Lin Y, Yu Z (2024b) A bibliometric analysis of artificial intelligence chatbots in educational contexts. Interact Technol Smart Educ 21(2):189–213. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-12-2022-0165

Liu L, Duffy VG (2023) Exploring the future development of Artificial Intelligence (AI) applications in chatbots: a bibliometric analysis. Int J Soc Robot 15(5):703–716. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-022-00956-0

Liu R, Li X, Chu J (2022) Evolution of applied variables in the research on technology acceptance of the elderly. In: International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp 500–520. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05581-23_5

Luijkx K, Peek S, Wouters E (2015) “Grandma, you should do it—It’s cool” Older Adults and the Role of Family Members in Their Acceptance of Technology. Int J Environ Res Public Health 12(12):15470–15485. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph121214999

Lussier M, Lavoie M, Giroux S, Consel C, Guay M, Macoir J, Bier N (2018) Early detection of mild cognitive impairment with in-home monitoring sensor technologies using functional measures: a systematic review. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform 23(2):838–847. https://doi.org/10.1109/JBHI.2018.2834317

López-Robles JR, Otegi-Olaso JR, Porto Gomez I, Gamboa-Rosales NK, Gamboa-Rosales H, Robles-Berumen H (2018) Bibliometric network analysis to identify the intellectual structure and evolution of the big data research field. In: International Conference on Intelligent Data Engineering and Automated Learning, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp 113–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03496-2_13

Ma Q, Chan AH, Chen K (2016) Personal and other factors affecting acceptance of smartphone technology by older Chinese adults. Appl Ergon 54:62–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2015.11.015

Ma Q, Chan AHS, Teh PL (2021) Insights into Older Adults’ Technology Acceptance through Meta-Analysis. Int J Hum-Comput Interact 37(11):1049–1062. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1865005

Macedo IM (2017) Predicting the acceptance and use of information and communication technology by older adults: An empirical examination of the revised UTAUT2. Comput Human Behav 75:935–948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.06.013

Maidhof C, Offermann J, Ziefle M (2023) Eyes on privacy: acceptance of video-based AAL impacted by activities being filmed. Front Public Health 11:1186944. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1186944

Majumder S, Aghayi E, Noferesti M, Memarzadeh-Tehran H, Mondal T, Pang Z, Deen MJ (2017) Smart homes for elderly healthcare—Recent advances and research challenges. Sensors 17(11):2496. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17112496

Article   ADS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Mhlanga D (2023) Artificial Intelligence in elderly care: Navigating ethical and responsible AI adoption for seniors. Available at SSRN 4675564. 4675564 min) Identifying citation patterns of scientific breakthroughs: A perspective of dynamic citation process. Inf Process Manag 58(1):102428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2020.102428

Mitzner TL, Boron JB, Fausset CB, Adams AE, Charness N, Czaja SJ, Sharit J (2010) Older adults talk technology: Technology usage and attitudes. Comput Human Behav 26(6):1710–1721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.020

Mitzner TL, Savla J, Boot WR, Sharit J, Charness N, Czaja SJ, Rogers WA (2019) Technology adoption by older adults: Findings from the PRISM trial. Gerontologist 59(1):34–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gny113

Mongeon P, Paul-Hus A (2016) The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics 106:213–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5

Mostaghel R (2016) Innovation and technology for the elderly: Systematic literature review. J Bus Res 69(11):4896–4900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.049

Mujirishvili T, Maidhof C, Florez-Revuelta F, Ziefle M, Richart-Martinez M, Cabrero-García J (2023) Acceptance and privacy perceptions toward video-based active and assisted living technologies: Scoping review. J Med Internet Res 25:e45297. https://doi.org/10.2196/45297

Naseri RNN, Azis SN, Abas N (2023) A Review of Technology Acceptance and Adoption Models in Consumer Study. FIRM J Manage Stud 8(2):188–199. https://doi.org/10.33021/firm.v8i2.4536

Nguyen UP, Hallinger P (2020) Assessing the distinctive contributions of Simulation & Gaming to the literature, 1970–2019: A bibliometric review. Simul Gaming 51(6):744–769. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878120941569

Olmedo-Aguirre JO, Reyes-Campos J, Alor-Hernández G, Machorro-Cano I, Rodríguez-Mazahua L, Sánchez-Cervantes JL (2022) Remote healthcare for elderly people using wearables: A review. Biosensors 12(2):73. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios12020073

Pan S, Jordan-Marsh M (2010) Internet use intention and adoption among Chinese older adults: From the expanded technology acceptance model perspective. Comput Human Behav 26(5):1111–1119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.015

Pan X, Yan E, Cui M, Hua W (2018) Examining the usage, citation, and diffusion patterns of bibliometric map software: A comparative study of three tools. J Informetr 12(2):481–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.03.005

Park JS, Kim NR, Han EJ (2018) Analysis of trends in science and technology using keyword network analysis. J Korea Ind Inf Syst Res 23(2):63–73. https://doi.org/10.9723/jksiis.2018.23.2.063

Peek ST, Luijkx KG, Rijnaard MD, Nieboer ME, Van Der Voort CS, Aarts S, Wouters EJ (2016) Older adults’ reasons for using technology while aging in place. Gerontology 62(2):226–237. https://doi.org/10.1159/000430949

Peek ST, Luijkx KG, Vrijhoef HJ, Nieboer ME, Aarts S, van der Voort CS, Wouters EJ (2017) Origins and consequences of technology acquirement by independent-living seniors: Towards an integrative model. BMC Geriatr 17:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-017-0582-5

Peek ST, Wouters EJ, Van Hoof J, Luijkx KG, Boeije HR, Vrijhoef HJ (2014) Factors influencing acceptance of technology for aging in place: a systematic review. Int J Med Inform 83(4):235–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.01.004

Peek STM, Luijkx KG, Vrijhoef HJM, Nieboer ME, Aarts S, Van Der Voort CS, Wouters EJM (2019) Understanding changes and stability in the long-term use of technologies by seniors who are aging in place: a dynamical framework. BMC Geriatr 19:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-019-1241-9

Perez AJ, Siddiqui F, Zeadally S, Lane D (2023) A review of IoT systems to enable independence for the elderly and disabled individuals. Internet Things 21:100653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iot.2022.100653

Piau A, Wild K, Mattek N, Kaye J (2019) Current state of digital biomarker technologies for real-life, home-based monitoring of cognitive function for mild cognitive impairment to mild Alzheimer disease and implications for clinical care: systematic review. J Med Internet Res 21(8):e12785. https://doi.org/10.2196/12785

Pirzada P, Wilde A, Doherty GH, Harris-Birtill D (2022) Ethics and acceptance of smart homes for older adults. Inform Health Soc Care 47(1):10–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538157.2021.1923500

Pranckutė R (2021) Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world. Publications 9(1):12. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010012

Qian K, Zhang Z, Yamamoto Y, Schuller BW (2021) Artificial intelligence internet of things for the elderly: From assisted living to health-care monitoring. IEEE Signal Process Mag 38(4):78–88. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSP.2021.3057298

Redner S (1998) How popular is your paper? An empirical study of the citation distribution. Eur Phys J B-Condens Matter Complex Syst 4(2):131–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s100510050359

Sayago S (ed.) (2019) Perspectives on human-computer interaction research with older people. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-06076-3

Schomakers EM, Ziefle M (2023) Privacy vs. security: trade-offs in the acceptance of smart technologies for aging-in-place. Int J Hum Comput Interact 39(5):1043–1058. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2078463

Schroeder T, Dodds L, Georgiou A, Gewald H, Siette J (2023) Older adults and new technology: Mapping review of the factors associated with older adults’ intention to adopt digital technologies. JMIR Aging 6(1):e44564. https://doi.org/10.2196/44564

Seibert K, Domhoff D, Bruch D, Schulte-Althoff M, Fürstenau D, Biessmann F, Wolf-Ostermann K (2021) Application scenarios for artificial intelligence in nursing care: rapid review. J Med Internet Res 23(11):e26522. https://doi.org/10.2196/26522

Seuwou P, Banissi E, Ubakanma G (2016) User acceptance of information technology: A critical review of technology acceptance models and the decision to invest in Information Security. In: Global Security, Safety and Sustainability-The Security Challenges of the Connected World: 11th International Conference, ICGS3 2017, London, UK, January 18-20, 2017, Proceedings 11:230-251. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51064-4_19

Shiau WL, Wang X, Zheng F (2023) What are the trend and core knowledge of information security? A citation and co-citation analysis. Inf Manag 60(3):103774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2023.103774

Sinha S, Verma A, Tiwari P (2021) Technology: Saving and enriching life during COVID-19. Front Psychol 12:647681. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.647681

Soar J (2010) The potential of information and communication technologies to support ageing and independent living. Ann Telecommun 65:479–483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12243-010-0167-1

Strotmann A, Zhao D (2012) Author name disambiguation: What difference does it make in author‐based citation analysis? J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 63(9):1820–1833. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22695

Talukder MS, Sorwar G, Bao Y, Ahmed JU, Palash MAS (2020) Predicting antecedents of wearable healthcare technology acceptance by elderly: A combined SEM-Neural Network approach. Technol Forecast Soc Change 150:119793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119793

Taskin Z, Al U (2019) Natural language processing applications in library and information science. Online Inf Rev 43(4):676–690. https://doi.org/10.1108/oir-07-2018-0217

Touqeer H, Zaman S, Amin R, Hussain M, Al-Turjman F, Bilal M (2021) Smart home security: challenges, issues and solutions at different IoT layers. J Supercomput 77(12):14053–14089. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-021-03825-1

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2023) World population ageing 2023: Highlights. https://www.un.org/zh/193220

Valk CAL, Lu Y, Randriambelonoro M, Jessen J (2018) Designing for technology acceptance of wearable and mobile technologies for senior citizen users. In: 21st DMI: Academic Design Management Conference (ADMC 2018), Design Management Institute, pp 1361–1373. https://www.dmi.org/page/ADMC2018

Van Eck N, Waltman L (2010) Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 84(2):523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3

Vancea M, Solé-Casals J (2016) Population aging in the European Information Societies: towards a comprehensive research agenda in eHealth innovations for elderly. Aging Dis 7(4):526. https://doi.org/10.14336/AD.2015.1214

Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD (2003) User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q 27(3):425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540

Wagner N, Hassanein K, Head M (2010) Computer use by older adults: A multi-disciplinary review. Comput Human Behav 26(5):870–882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.029

Wahlroos N, Narsakka N, Stolt M, Suhonen R (2023) Physical environment maintaining independence and self-management of older people in long-term care settings—An integrative literature review. J Aging Environ 37(3):295–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/26892618.2022.2092927

Wang CL, Chen XJ, Yu T, Liu YD, Jing YH (2024a) Education reform and change driven by digital technology: a bibliometric study from a global perspective. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11(1):1–17. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02717-y

Wang CL, Dai J, Zhu KK, Yu T, Gu XQ (2023a) Understanding the Continuance Intention of College Students Toward New E-learning Spaces Based on an Integrated Model of the TAM and TTF. Int J Hum-comput Int 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2291609

Wang CL, Wang HM, Li YY, Dai J, Gu XQ, Yu T (2024b) Factors Influencing University Students’ Behavioral Intention to Use Generative Artificial Intelligence: Integrating the Theory of Planned Behavior and AI Literacy. Int J Hum-comput Int 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2383033

Wang J, Zhao W, Zhang Z, Liu X, Xie T, Wang L, Zhang Y (2024c) A journey of challenges and victories: a bibliometric worldview of nanomedicine since the 21st century. Adv Mater 36(15):2308915. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202308915

Wang J, Chen Y, Huo S, Mai L, Jia F (2023b) Research hotspots and trends of social robot interaction design: A bibliometric analysis. Sensors 23(23):9369. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23239369

Wang KH, Chen G, Chen HG (2017) A model of technology adoption by older adults. Soc Behav Personal 45(4):563–572. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.5778

Wang S, Bolling K, Mao W, Reichstadt J, Jeste D, Kim HC, Nebeker C (2019) Technology to Support Aging in Place: Older Adults’ Perspectives. Healthcare 7(2):60. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare7020060

Wang Z, Liu D, Sun Y, Pang X, Sun P, Lin F, Ren K (2022) A survey on IoT-enabled home automation systems: Attacks and defenses. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor 24(4):2292–2328. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2022.3201557

Wilkowska W, Offermann J, Spinsante S, Poli A, Ziefle M (2022) Analyzing technology acceptance and perception of privacy in ambient assisted living for using sensor-based technologies. PloS One 17(7):e0269642. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269642

Wilson J, Heinsch M, Betts D, Booth D, Kay-Lambkin F (2021) Barriers and facilitators to the use of e-health by older adults: a scoping review. BMC Public Health 21:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-11623-w

Xia YQ, Deng YL, Tao XY, Zhang SN, Wang CL (2024) Digital art exhibitions and psychological well-being in Chinese Generation Z: An analysis based on the S-O-R framework. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11:266. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02718-x

Xie H, Zhang Y, Duan K (2020) Evolutionary overview of urban expansion based on bibliometric analysis in Web of Science from 1990 to 2019. Habitat Int 95:102100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2019.10210

Xu Z, Ge Z, Wang X, Skare M (2021) Bibliometric analysis of technology adoption literature published from 1997 to 2020. Technol Forecast Soc Change 170:120896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120896

Yap YY, Tan SH, Choon SW (2022) Elderly’s intention to use technologies: a systematic literature review. Heliyon 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08765

Yu T, Dai J, Wang CL (2023) Adoption of blended learning: Chinese university students’ perspectives. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10:390. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01904-7

Yusif S, Soar J, Hafeez-Baig A (2016) Older people, assistive technologies, and the barriers to adoption: A systematic review. Int J Med Inform 94:112–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2016.07.004

Zhang J, Zhu L (2022) Citation recommendation using semantic representation of cited papers’ relations and content. Expert Syst Appl 187:115826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115826

Zhao Y, Li J (2024) Opportunities and challenges of integrating artificial intelligence in China’s elderly care services. Sci Rep 14(1):9254. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-60067-w

Article   ADS   MathSciNet   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Social Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province in China (Grant No. 2023J014).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Art and Design, Shaanxi University of Science and Technology, Xi’an, China

Xianru Shang, Zijian Liu, Chen Gong, Zhigang Hu & Yuexuan Wu

Department of Education Information Technology, Faculty of Education, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China

Chengliang Wang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization, XS, YW, CW; methodology, XS, ZL, CG, CW; software, XS, CG, YW; writing-original draft preparation, XS, CW; writing-review and editing, XS, CG, ZH, CW; supervision, ZL, ZH, CW; project administration, ZL, ZH, CW; funding acquisition, XS, CG. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. All authors have read and approved the re-submission of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chengliang Wang .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was not required as the study did not involve human participants.

Informed consent

Informed consent was not required as the study did not involve human participants.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Shang, X., Liu, Z., Gong, C. et al. Knowledge mapping and evolution of research on older adults’ technology acceptance: a bibliometric study from 2013 to 2023. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 1115 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03658-2

Download citation

Received : 20 June 2024

Accepted : 21 August 2024

Published : 31 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03658-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Positive energy districts: fundamentals, assessment methodologies, modeling and research gaps.

1. Introduction

State of the art on positive energy districts, 2. methodology.

• Setting: a café-like environment with small, round tables, tablecloths, colored pens, sticky notes and any interaction tool available.
• Welcome and Introduction: the host offers a welcome, introduces the World Café process, and sets the context.
• Small-Group Rounds: three or more twenty-minute rounds of conversations occur in small groups. Participants switch tables after each round, with one person optionally remaining as the “table host” to brief newcomers.
• Questions: each round starts with a context-specific question. Questions may remain constant or be built upon each other to guide the discussion.
• Harvest: participants share their discussion insights with the larger group, often visually represented through graphic recording.
• Objectives of the workshop and preparation. The first step of the World Café approach is to identify the main objectives. For this workshop, there was the need to investigate the current landscape of PED research, as well as to have a benchmark and collect feedback on the current research activities within Annex 83. Questions were structured in order to frame the current state-of-the-art understanding of the topic. A mapping of the potential different stakeholders in the PED design and implementation process was carried out at this stage. As a result, municipalities, community representatives, energy contractors, real estate companies and commercial facilitators, as well as citizens, were identified as main target groups. Later, the follow-up discussions were built around these main actors. Further, the mapping of the stakeholders’ involvement was carried out for better understanding the complexity of relationships, roles and synergies as well as the impact on the design, implementation and operation stages of PEDs.
• Positive Energy Districts’ definitions and fundamentals ( Section 3.1 ).
• Quality-of-life indicators in Positive Energy Districts ( Section 3.2 ).
• Technologies in Positive Energy Districts: development, use and barriers ( Section 3.3 ).
• Positive Energy Districts modeling: what is further needed to model PEDs? ( Section 3.4 ).
• Sustainability assessment of Positive Energy Districts ( Section 3.5 ).
• Stakeholder engagement within the design process ( Section 3.6 ).
• Tools and guidelines for PED implementation ( Section 3.7 ).

3.1. Positive Energy Districts Definitions and Fundamentals

3.2. quality-of-life indicators in positive energy districts, 3.3. technologies in positive energy districts: development, use and barriers, 3.4. positive energy districts modeling: what is further needed to model peds, 3.5. sustainability assessment of positive energy districts, 3.6. stakeholder engagement within the design process, 3.7. tools and guidelines for ped implementation, 4. conclusions, author contributions, data availability statement, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest.

• European Commission; Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. 100 Climate-Neutral Cities by 2030—By and for the Citizens ; European Commission: Luxembourg, 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Department of Economic and Social Affairs United Nations. 68% of the World Population Projected to Live in Urban Areas by 2050, Says UN. Available online: https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/2018-revision-of-world-urbanization-prospects.html (accessed on 24 June 2024).
• Fatima, Z.; Vacha, T.; Swamygowda, K.; Qubailat, R. Getting Started with Positive Energy Districts: Experience until Now from Maia, Reykjavik, Kifissia, Kladno and Lviv. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 5799. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• OECD. Managing Environmental and Energy Transitions for Regions and Cities ; OECD: Paris, France, 2020; Available online: https://www.oecd.org/en/about/projects/managing-environmental-and-energy-transitions-for-regions-and-cities.html (accessed on 24 June 2024).
• Pierce, S.; Pallonetto, F.; De Donatis, L.; De Rosa, M. District energy modelling for decarbonisation strategies development—The case of a University campus. Energy Rep. 2024 , 11 , 1256–1267. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• U.N. SDGs Goal 11|Make Cities and Human Settlements Inclusive, Safe, Resilient and Sustainable. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal11 (accessed on 24 June 2024).
• Shahmohammad, M.; Salamattalab, M.M.; Sohn, W.; Kouhizadeh, M.; Aghamohmmadi, N. Opportunities and obstacles of blockchain use in pursuit of sustainable development goal 11: A systematic scoping review. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2024 , 112 , 105620. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Koch, F.; Ahmad, S. How to Measure Progress Towards an Inclusive, Safe, Resilient and Sustainable City? Reflections on Applying the Indicators of Sustainable Development Goal 11 in Germany and India. In Urban Transformations. Future City ; Kabisch, S., Koch, F., Gawel, E., Haase, A., Knapp, S., Krellenberg, K., Nivala, J., Zehnsdorf, A., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; Volume 10. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sarvari, H.; Mehrabi, A.; Chan, D.W.M.; Cristofaro, M. Evaluating urban housing development patterns in developing countries: Case study of Worn-out Urban Fabrics in Iran. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021 , 70 , 102941. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gondeck, M.; Triebel, M.-A.; Steingrube, A.; Albert-Seifried, V.; Stryi-Hipp, G. Recommendations for a positive energy district framework—Application and evaluation of different energetic assessment methodologies. Smart Energy 2024 , 15 , 100147. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gohari, S.; Castro Silvia, S.; Ashrafian, T.; Konstantinou, T.; Giancola, E.; Prebreza, B.; Aelenei, L.; Murauskaite, L.; Liu, M. Unraveling the implementation processes of PEDs: Lesson learned from multiple urban contexts. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2024 , 106 , 105402. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sassenou, L.-N.; Olivieri, L.; Olivieri, F. Challenges for positive energy districts deployment: A systematic review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2024 , 191 , 114152. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Good, N.; Martínez Ceseña, E.A.; Mancarella, P. Chapter Two—Energy Positivity and Flexibility in Districts. In Energy Positive Neighborhoods and Smart Energy Districts ; Monti, A., Pesch, D., Ellis, K.A., Mancarella, P., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017; pp. 7–30. ISBN 9780128099513. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Derkenbaeva, E.; Halleck Vega, S.; Hofstede, G.J.; van Leeuwen, E. Positive Energy Districts: Mainstreaming Energy Transition in Urban Areas. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022 , 153 , 111782. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bruck, A.; Díaz Ruano, S.; Auer, H. One Piece of the Puzzle towards 100 Positive Energy Districts (PEDs) across Europe by 2025: An Open-Source Approach to Unveil Favourable Locations of PV-Based PEDs from a Techno-Economic Perspective. Energy 2022 , 254 , 124152. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vandevyvere, H.; Ahlers, D.; Wyckmans, A. The Sense and Non-Sense of PEDs—Feeding Back Practical Experiences of Positive Energy District Demonstrators into the European PED Framework Definition Development Process. Energies 2022 , 15 , 4491. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Natanian, J.; Magyari, A.; Brunetti, A.; Reith, A.; Guarino, F.; Manapragada, N.; Cellura, S.; de Luca, F.; Naboni, E. Ten Questions on Tools and Methods for Positive Energy Districts. Build. Environ. 2024 , 255 , 111429. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Perera, A.T.D.; Javanroodi, K.; Wang, Y.; Hong, T. Urban Cells: Extending the Energy Hub Concept to Facilitate Sector and Spatial Coupling. Adv. Appl. Energy 2021 , 3 , 100046. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Aparisi-Cerdá, I.; Ribó-Pérez, D.; Cuesta-Fernandez, I.; Gómez-Navarro, T. Planning Positive Energy Districts in Urban Water Fronts: Approach to La Marina de València, Spain. Energy Convers. Manag. 2022 , 265 , 115795. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sareen, S.; Albert-Seifried, V.; Aelenei, L.; Reda, F.; Etminan, G.; Andreucci, M.-B.; Kuzmic, M.; Maas, N.; Seco, O.; Civiero, P.; et al. Ten Questions Concerning Positive Energy Districts. Build. Environ. 2022 , 216 , 109017. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mihailova, D.; Schubert, I.; Burger, P.; Fritz, M.M.C. Exploring modes of sustainable value co-creation in renewable energy communities. J. Clean. Prod. 2022 , 330 , 129917. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mihailova, D.; Schubert, I.; Martinez-Cruz, A.L.; Hearn, A.X.; Sohre, A. Preferences for configurations of Positive Energy Districts—Insights from a discrete choice experiment on Swiss households. Energy Policy 2022 , 163 , 112824. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Working Group SET. Plan Temporary SET-Plan ACTION n 3.2 Implementation Plan: Europe to Become a Global Role Model in Integrated, Innovative Solutions for the Planning, Deployment, and Replication of Positive Energy Districts ; 2018. Available online: https://jpi-urbaneurope.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/setplan_smartcities_implementationplan-2.pdf (accessed on 24 June 2024).
• JPI Urban Europe/SET Plan Action 3.2. In White Paper on PED Reference Framework for Positive Energy Districts and Neighbourhoods ; 2020. Available online: https://jpi-urbaneurope.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/White-Paper-PED-Framework-Definition-2020323-final.pdf (accessed on 24 June 2024).
• ATELIER. Atelier—Positive Energy Districts. Available online: https://smartcity-atelier.eu/ (accessed on 24 June 2024).
• EURAC Smart-BEEjS—Human-Centric Energy Districts: Smart Value Generation by Building Efficiency and Energy Justice for Sustainable Living. Available online: https://www.eurac.edu/en/institutes-centers/institute-for-renewable-energy/projects/smart-beejs (accessed on 24 June 2024).
• Making City Making City—Energy Efficient Pathway for the City Transformation. Available online: https://makingcity.eu/ (accessed on 24 June 2024).
• +CityxChange. Available online: https://cityxchange.eu/ (accessed on 24 June 2024).
• Uspenskaia, D.; Specht, K.; Kondziella, H.; Bruckner, T. Challenges and Barriers for Net-Zero/Positive Energy Buildings and Districts—Empirical Evidence from the Smart City Project SPARCS. Buildings 2021 , 11 , 78. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hedman, Å.; Rehman, H.U.; Gabaldón, A.; Bisello, A.; Albert-Seifried, V.; Zhang, X.; Guarino, F.; Grynning, S.; Eicker, U.; Neumann, H.-M.; et al. IEA EBC Annex83 Positive Energy Districts. Buildings 2021 , 11 , 130. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gabaldón Moreno, A.; Vélez, F.; Alpagut, B.; Hernández, P.; Sanz Montalvillo, C. How to Achieve Positive Energy Districts for Sustainable Cities: A Proposed Calculation Methodology. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 710. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Aghamolaei, R.; Shamsi, M.H.; Tahsildoost, M.; O’Donnell, J. Review of district-scale energy performance analysis: Outlooks towards holistic urban frameworks. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2018 , 41 , 252–264. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bottecchia, L.; Gabaldón, A.; Castillo-Calzadilla, T.; Soutullo, S.; Ranjbar, S.; Eicker, U. Fundamentals of Energy Modelling for Positive Energy Districts. In Sustainability in Energy and Buildings ; Littlewood, J.R., Howlett, R.J., Jain, L.C., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2022; Volume 263, Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, S.; Ma, M.; Zhou, N.; Yan, J.; Feng, W.; Yan, R.; You, K.; Zhang, J.; Ke, J. Estimation of Global Building Stocks by 2070: Unlocking Renovation Potential. Nexus 2024 , 1 , 100019. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xiang, X.; Zhou, N.; Ma, M.; Feng, W.; Yan, R. Global transition of operational carbon in residential buildings since the millennium. Adv. Appl. Energy 2023 , 11 , 100145. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yan, R.; Ma, M.; Zhou, N.; Feng, W.; Xiang, X.; Mao, C. Towards COP27: Decarbonization patterns of residential building in China and India. Appl. Energy 2023 , 352 , 122003. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yuan, H.; Ma, M.; Zhou, N.; Xie, H.; Ma, Z.; Xiang, X.; Ma, X. Battery electric vehicle charging in China: Energy demand and emissions trends in the 2020s. Appl. Energy 2024 , 365 , 123153. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Orehounig, K.; Evins, R.; Dorer, V. Integration of Decentralized Energy Systems in Neighbourhoods Using the Energy Hub Approach. Appl. Energy 2015 , 154 , 277–289. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pan, Z.; Guo, Q.; Sun, H. Interactions of District Electricity and Heating Systems Considering Time-Scale Characteristics Based on Quasi-Steady Multi-Energy Flow. Appl. Energy 2016 , 167 , 230–243. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhou, Y.; Cao, S.; Hensen, J.L.M. An energy paradigm transition framework from negative towards positive district energy sharing networks—Battery cycling aging, advanced battery management strategies, flexible vehicles-to-buildings interactions, uncertainty and sensitivity analysis. Appl. Energy 2021 , 288 , 116606. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Marrasso, E.; Martone, C.; Pallotta, G.; Roselli, C.; Sasso, M. Assessment of energy systems configurations in mixed-use Positive Energy Districts through novel indicators for energy and environmental analysis. Appl. Energy 2024 , 368 , 123374. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bruck, A.; Díaz Ruano, S.; Auer, H. A Critical Perspective on Positive Energy Districts in Climatically Favoured Regions: An Open-Source Modelling Approach Disclosing Implications and Possibilities. Energies 2021 , 14 , 4864. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ali, U.; Shamsi, M.H.; Hoare, C.; Mangina, E.; O’Donnell, J. Review of Urban Building Energy Modeling (UBEM) Approaches, Methods and Tools Using Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis. Energy Build. 2021 , 246 , 111073. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Brunetti, A.; Cellura, S.; Guarino, F.; Longo, S.; Mistretta, M.; Reda, F.; Rincione, R. Development of an Early Design Tool for the Sustainability Assessment of Positive Energy Districts: Methodology, Implementation and Case-Studies. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2023 , 2600 , 82020. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Trulsrud, T.H.; Van der Leer, J. Towards a positive energy balance: A comparative analysis of the planning and design of four positive energy districts and neighbourhoods in Norway and Sweden. Energy Build. 2024 , 318 , 114429. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Guasselli, F.; Vavouris, A.; Stankovic, L.; Stankovic, V.; Didierjean, S.; Gram-Hanssen, K. Smart energy technologies for the collective: Time-shifting, demand reduction and household practices in a Positive Energy Neighbourhood in Norway. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2024 , 110 , 103436. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Aparisi-Cerdá, I.; Ribó-Pérez, D.; Gómez-Navarro, T.; García-Melón, M.; Peris-Blanes, J. Prioritising Positive Energy Districts to achieve carbon neutral cities: Delphi-DANP approach. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2024 , 203 , 114764. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Castillo-Calzadilla, T.; Garay-Martinez, R.; Martin Andonegui, C. Holistic fuzzy logic methodology to assess positive energy district (PathPED). Sustain. Cities Soc. 2023 , 89 , 104375. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Derkenbaeva, E.; Jan Hofstede, G.; van Leeuwen, E.; Halleck Vega, S.; Wolfers, J. ENERGY Pro: Spatially explicit agent-based model on achieving positive energy districts. MethodsX 2024 , 12 , 102779. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Eicker, U. Introduction: The Challenges of the Urban Energy Transition. In Urban Energy Systems for Low-Carbon Cities ; Eicker, U., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2019; pp. 1–15. ISBN 978-0-12-811553-4. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jepsen, B.K.H.; Haut, T.W.; Design, M.J. Modelling and Performance Evaluation of a Positive Energy District in a Danish Island. Future Cities Environ. 2022 , 8 , 1. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Guarino, F.; Bisello, A.; Frieden, D.; Bastos, J.; Brunetti, A.; Cellura, M.; Ferraro, M.; Fichera, A.; Giancola, E.; Haase, M.; et al. State of the Art on Sustainability Assessment of Positive Energy Districts: Methodologies, Indicators and Future Perspectives. Sustain. Energy Build. 2021 , 2021 , 479–492. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hearn, A.X.; Sohre, A.; Burger, P. Innovative but Unjust? Analysing the Opportunities and Justice Issues within Positive Energy Districts in Europe. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2021 , 78 , 102127. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Haarstad, H.; Wathne, M.W. Are Smart City Projects Catalyzing Urban Energy Sustainability? Energy Policy 2019 , 129 , 918–925. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gouveia, J.P.; Seixas, J.; Palma, P.; Duarte, H.; Luz, H.; Cavadini, G.B.C. Positive Energy District: A Model for Historic Districts to Address Energy Poverty. Front. Sustain. Cities 2021 , 3 , 648473. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bossi, S.; Gollner, C.; Theierling, S. Towards 100 Positive Energy Districts in Europe: Preliminary Data Analysis of 61 European Cases. Energies 2020 , 13 , 6083. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rankinen, J.-A.; Lakkala, S.; Haapasalo, H.; Hirvonen-Kantola, S. Stakeholder Management in PED Projects: Challenges and Management Model. Int. J. Sustain. Energy Plan. Manag. 2022 , 34 , 91–106. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Schiele, H.; Krummaker, S.; Hoffmann, P.; Kowalski, R. The “research world café” as method of scientific enquiry: Combining rigor with relevance and speed. J. Bus. Res. 2022 , 140 , 280–296. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vandevyvere, H.; Ahlers, D.; Alpagut, B.; Cerna, V.; Cimini, V.; Haxhija, S.; Hukkalainen, M.; Kuzmic, M.; Livik, K.; Padilla, M.; et al. Positive Energy Districts Solution Booklet ; European Union: Luxembourg, 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Évora—POCITYF. Available online: https://pocityf.eu/city/evora/ (accessed on 24 June 2024).
• Commission, E.; European Climate, I.; Agency, E.E.; Alpagut, B.; Zhang, X.; Gabaldon, A.; Hernandez, P. Digitalization in Urban. Energy Systems—Outlook 2025, 2030 and 2040 ; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2022. [ Google Scholar ]
• Waglé, S.; Singh, J.; Shah, P. Citizen Report Card Surveys: A Note on the Concept and Methodology (English) ; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2004. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cimini, V.; Giglio, F.; Carbonari, G. D2.4: Report on Bankability of the Demonstrated Innovations. In +CityxChange—Work Package 2 Task 2.7 ; 2019. Available online: https://cityxchange.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/D2.4-Report-on-Bankability-of-the-Demonstrated-Innovations_v3.0-final.pdf (accessed on 24 June 2024).
• Cordis—Horizon 2020 Results in Brief. A Collaborative Approach Promotes Net Zero Energy Settlements. In Achieving near Zero and Positive Energy Settlements in Europe Using Advanced Energy Technology ; 2021. Available online: https://cordis.europa.eu/article/id/430390-a-collaborative-approach-promotes-net-zero-energy-settlements (accessed on 24 June 2024).
• Krangsås, S.G.; Steemers, K.; Konstantinou, T.; Soutullo, S.; Liu, M.; Giancola, E.; Prebreza, B.; Ashrafian, T.; Murauskaitė, L.; Maas, N. Positive Energy Districts: Identifying Challenges and Interdependencies. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 10551. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Prina, M.G.; Manzolini, G.; Moser, D.; Nastasi, B.; Sparber, W. Classification and Challenges of Bottom-up Energy System Models—A Review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020 , 129 , 109917. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Allegrini, J.; Orehounig, K.; Mavromatidis, G.; Ruesch, F.; Dorer, V.; Evins, R. A Review of Modelling Approaches and Tools for the Simulation of District-Scale Energy Systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015 , 52 , 1391–1404. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lyden, A.; Pepper, R.; Tuohy, P.G. A Modelling Tool Selection Process for Planning of Community Scale Energy Systems Including Storage and Demand Side Management. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2018 , 39 , 674–688. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tozzi, P.; Jo, J.H. A Comparative Analysis of Renewable Energy Simulation Tools: Performance Simulation Model vs. System Optimization. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017 , 80 , 390–398. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hall, L.M.H.; Buckley, A.R. A Review of Energy Systems Models in the UK: Prevalent Usage and Categorisation. Appl. Energy 2016 , 169 , 607–628. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ringkjøb, H.-K.; Haugan, P.M.; Solbrekke, I.M. A Review of Modelling Tools for Energy and Electricity Systems with Large Shares of Variable Renewables. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018 , 96 , 440–459. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Neumann, H.M.; Garayo, S.D.; Gaitani, N.; Vettorato, D.; Aelenei, L.; Borsboom, J.; Etminan, G.; Kozlowska, A.; Reda, F.; Rose, J.; et al. Qualitative Assessment Methodology for Positive Energy District Planning Guidelines. In Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies ; Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022; Volume 263, pp. 507–517. [ Google Scholar ]
• Li, L.; Lange, K.W. Planning Principles for Integrating Community Empowerment into Zero-Net Carbon Transformation. Smart Cities 2023 , 6 , 100–122. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Turci, G.; Alpagut, B.; Civiero, P.; Kuzmic, M.; Pagliula, S.; Massa, G.; Albert-Seifried, V.; Seco, O.; Soutullo, S. A Comprehensive PED-Database for Mapping and Comparing Positive Energy Districts Experiences at European Level. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 427. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• PED DB: Map—PED-EU-NET|COST ACTION CA19126. Available online: https://pedeu.net/map/ (accessed on 15 January 2024).
• European Union. New European Bauhaus. Available online: https://new-european-bauhaus.europa.eu/about/dashboard_en (accessed on 30 June 2024).
• Volpe, R.; Gonzalez Alriols, M.; Martelo Schmalbach, N.; Fichera, A. Optimal design and operation of distributed electrical generation for Italian positive energy districts with biomass district heating. Energy Convers. Manag. 2022 , 267 , 115937. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bilić, B.; Šmit, K. Evaluation of the New European Bauhaus in Urban Plans by Land Use Occurrence Indicators: A Case Study in Rijeka, Croatia. Buildings 2024 , 14 , 1058. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fichera, A.; Pluchino, A.; Volpe, R. Local Production and Storage in Positive Energy Districts: The Energy Sharing Perspective. Front. Sustain. Cities 2021 , 3 , 690927. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cellura, M.; Fichera, A.; Guarino, F.; Volpe, R. Sustainable Development Goals and Performance Measurement of Positive Energy District: A Methodological Approach. Conference paper-Book Chapter. In Sustainability in Energy and Buildings ; Springer: Singapore, 2021; Volume 263, pp. 519–527. [ Google Scholar ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Kozlowska, A.; Guarino, F.; Volpe, R.; Bisello, A.; Gabaldòn, A.; Rezaei, A.; Albert-Seifried, V.; Alpagut, B.; Vandevyvere, H.; Reda, F.; et al. Positive Energy Districts: Fundamentals, Assessment Methodologies, Modeling and Research Gaps. Energies 2024 , 17 , 4425. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17174425

Kozlowska A, Guarino F, Volpe R, Bisello A, Gabaldòn A, Rezaei A, Albert-Seifried V, Alpagut B, Vandevyvere H, Reda F, et al. Positive Energy Districts: Fundamentals, Assessment Methodologies, Modeling and Research Gaps. Energies . 2024; 17(17):4425. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17174425

Kozlowska, Anna, Francesco Guarino, Rosaria Volpe, Adriano Bisello, Andrea Gabaldòn, Abolfazl Rezaei, Vicky Albert-Seifried, Beril Alpagut, Han Vandevyvere, Francesco Reda, and et al. 2024. "Positive Energy Districts: Fundamentals, Assessment Methodologies, Modeling and Research Gaps" Energies 17, no. 17: 4425. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17174425

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

Department of Education

New research highlights opportunities and challenges of ai chatbots in higher education.

The new study is a crucial step in consolidating knowledge about AI in education and in particular AI chatbots, urging caution against overly optimistic or pessimistic views, and calling for more grounded research approaches to better understand the true impact of AI chatbots in the classroom and on teaching and learning practices. 

The study examines the emerging research area of Artifical Intelligence (AI) chatbots in Higher Education, focusing specifically on empirical studies conducted since the release of Chat GPT. The review includes 23 research articles published between December 2022 and December 2023 exploring the use of AI chatbots in Higher Education settings.

The study takes a three-pronged approach to the empirical data; examining the state of the emerging field of AI chatbots in Higher Education, the theories of learning used in the empirical studies and it scrutinizes the discourses of AI in Higher Education framing the latest empirical work on AI chatbots.

Study reveals gaps and overhyped expectations

Many studies reviewed did not use established learning theories to analyze AI chatbots, indicating a gap in how these tools are being understood from a learning perspective. This suggests that the empirical work does not yet offer insights into the mechanisms of learning that chatbots may facilitate.

The study highlights a tendency in the literature to use exaggerated language in both dystopian and utopian manner, with some claims about AI chatbots' potential being unsupported by the empirical evidence.

Lack of consistent framework

The research also shows that while AI chatbots are being explored across various disciplines, there is no consistent framework for understanding their effects on education. Replication studies are needed to determine how students engage with chatbots and how such interaction may affect their learning. Teachers are skeptical to the value AI chatbots bring to teaching and learning practices.

Link to the study 

Generative AI chatbots in higher education: a review of an emerging research area Springer (2024), Open Access

Cormac McGrath , Associate Professor, Department of Education, Stockholm University.

Alexandra Farazouli , PhD student, Department of Education, Stockholm University.

Teresa Cerratto-Pargman , professor of Human-machine interaction, Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University.

The Research Group on Higher Education Learning Practices at Stockholm University engages in theoretical and empirical research on different aspects of higher education.

Last updated: September 3, 2024

Source: IPD

US housing inflation likely to fall in year ahead, Fed paper says

• Medium Text

Sign up here.

Reporting by Ann Saphir Editing by Chris Reese

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. , opens new tab

Nvidia suffers record $279 billion loss in market value as Wall St drops

Shares of AI heavyweight Nvidia tumbled 9.5% on Tuesday in the deepest ever single-day decline in market value for a U.S. company, as investors softened their optimism about artificial intelligence in a broad market selloff following tepid economic data.

• Republican Health Coverage Proposals Would Increase Number of Uninsured, Raise People’s Costs

An Overview of the Project 2025, Republican Study Committee, and House Budget Committee Plans

The Medicaid and marketplace proposals from the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 [1] blueprint, the Republican Study Committee’s (RSC) fiscal year 2025 budget, [2] and the Republican House Budget Committee’s (HBC) fiscal year 2025 budget resolution [3] would undermine Affordable Care Act (ACA) coverage protections, make health coverage more costly and less comprehensive, shift more costs to states, and increase the number of uninsured people in the U.S. These proposals would result in a future in which millions more people go without coverage, pay higher premiums if they have pre-existing conditions, or end up with skimpy health plans that don’t cover benefits they need. [4]

This paper focuses on the three plans’ proposed changes to eligibility requirements, consumer protections, financing, and coverage generosity for Medicaid, ACA marketplace insurance, and other health insurance. These and other conservative proposals set forth a vision that contrasts dramatically with recent coverage and affordability gains. This paper does not address these plans’ full range of health proposals, which also include scaling back rights and revoking access to health and economic supports for specific groups, including women, people of color, people with low incomes, people who are immigrants, and LGBTQ+ people. In particular, Project 2025’s health care agenda predominantly focuses on banning abortion and limiting access to contraception, rather than addressing high health care costs or reducing uninsurance.

While the proposals do not present themselves as repealing the ACA, the results would be much the same: higher costs for health coverage, loss of protections for people with pre-existing conditions, and an increase in the number of people without insurance. The plans call for undermining the ACA’s Medicaid expansion and making deep additional cuts in Medicaid, which would take away health coverage, raise the cost of health care, or reduce access to needed health services for millions of people. Children, parents, and people with disabilities could face higher costs and lower access to health coverage, and millions of low-income adults could be left with no options for affordable coverage. (See Figure 1.)

The RSC proposal would slash $4.5 trillion in federal investment in Medicaid, Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and marketplace coverage. [5] The similarly harsh HBC budget resolution includes $2.2 trillion in cuts to health coverage, and the report accompanying the resolution suggests that all of the cuts would come from Medicaid; if true, the cuts would amount to 30 percent over ten years, on average, and 40 percent in 2034. [6] The size of the cuts under Project 2025 is less clear but would also be extremely large.

The U.S. has made significant progress toward universal health coverage since the ACA’s enactment. [7] Uninsured rates have also fallen significantly across racial and ethnic groups since the ACA’s major coverage provisions took effect. [8] The proposals described here would roll back that progress via huge cuts to Medicaid and federal premium tax credits and by weakening protections for people with pre-existing conditions, taking the nation back to the pre-ACA era [9] — or worse —and disrupting and making health care unaffordable for millions of people.

Proposals Would Undermine Medicaid

Medicaid covers nearly 74 million people, [10] pays for 2 in 5 births in the U.S., [11] and is the nation’s largest payer of behavioral health services, which include mental health and substance use disorder treatment. [12] Project 2025, the RSC budget, and the HBC budget plan contain proposals that would undermine Medicaid by destabilizing its financing and severely reducing access to services. These proposals would increase health inequities and erase gains made since the ACA was enacted.

The proposals would jeopardize comprehensive coverage for people with low incomes by restructuring and cutting federal funding for the program, altering long-standing benefit protections, and denying Medicaid funding to providers who provide abortions. [13] They would also shift costs to states, which would lead to cuts in eligibility, benefits, and provider payment rates, effectively gutting many of the enrollee protections that are a hallmark of Medicaid.

Cost Shift to States Would Likely Result in Cuts to Benefits, Eligibility, Provider Rates

Medicaid is states’ single largest source of federal funds. [14] Therefore, policies that reduce or withdraw federal Medicaid funding have outsized impacts on state budgets. And because states must balance their budgets, federal Medicaid cuts lead states to cut other critical services or, more likely, cut Medicaid eligibility, benefits, or payments to providers and managed care plans. By shifting costs to states, Project 2025, the RSC budget, and the HBC budget plan would likely force states to cut the program in ways that would jeopardize coverage for millions — a fact that most of these proposals fail to mention.

Capping or Block-Granting Medicaid Funding

Project 2025 and the RSC and HBC budgets are designed to cut Medicaid spending, not to ensure that people have access to coverage. This goal is clear in their proposals to cap or block-grant Medicaid funding.

Since Medicaid’s inception, its funding model has been one where states put up a share of the cost of covered health care services and the federal government matches that state spending through a formula based on states’ per capita income; states with lower incomes receive a larger federal match than higher-income states. Requiring states to share in the cost of covered services gives them an important incentive to keep costs low when possible. But the federal government shares in all of the costs, and enrollees are assured of receiving all covered services that they need.

The three proposals include policies that dramatically change the federal government’s commitment to sharing in states’ Medicaid costs. By artificially capping Medicaid funding regardless of the health care needs of people in each state and by providing states with new flexibilities to curtail offered health services and/or eligibility, these proposals would result over time in fewer people being enrolled and in enrollees likely having less-robust coverage.

The HBC budget proposes a per capita cap, with the federal government paying state costs only up to a defined amount for various enrollee categories. The Project 2025 blueprint calls for per capita caps on federal spending, aggregate caps, or block grants, any of which would cut Medicaid spending substantially over time.

The more specific RSC plan would create five separate block grants, segregating spending for children, adults over 65, people with disabilities, pregnant women, and all other adults (including parents). But states would be able to shift funding from the “all other adults” category to other categories and could scale back or stop providing coverage to this group entirely, which would enable them to undermine or end the coverage that adults receive through the ACA’s Medicaid expansion. Spending for each block grant would grow based on population increases, but the RSC budget is silent about how the block grants would account for health care cost growth. Typically, block grant proposals base funding amounts on current or historical spending and then increase funding annually at a slower rate than Medicaid spending is expected to grow, which means the cut would deepen over time as funding falls further and further behind what is needed to provide health care services to beneficiaries. [15]

Compounding the block grant proposal’s potential damage, the RSC plan would eliminate standards that require states to provide Medicaid to children in families with incomes below a set level. And, for states that opt to continue covering parents and other adults with low incomes even with vastly reduced federal resources, the RSC plan would threaten people’s coverage a second way: by requiring states to take coverage away from people who don’t meet rigid work reporting requirements, described in more detail below.

As we have written, both per capita caps [16] and block grants would lead to cuts in eligibility, benefits, and provider reimbursement rates. [17] Caps would be set to generate savings, likely by indexing future growth at a rate that fails to keep pace with rising health insurance enrollment, health care costs, or both. (See Figure 2.) States could be forced to make even deeper cuts if enrollment or health care costs are higher than expected due to a recession, pandemic, new drugs and other high-cost technologies, or cost growth across the public and private health care system.

Any block grant proposal would likely be paired with provisions wiping away long-standing Medicaid rules in order to allow states to make draconian cuts — including eligibility changes that would undermine Medicaid’s basic tenet, since its inception, that program spending must respond to cover all people who apply and are found eligible. To stay within capped funding, states would likely be empowered to take steps such as capping overall enrollment, cutting coverage for certain eligibility groups (such as groups currently considered “optional,” which includes some children, some people with disabilities, and many adults), reducing health benefits (either broad reductions or those more narrowly tailored to “optional” services such as home- and community-based services), lowering payments to health care providers, or some combination of these.

Lowering provider payments can restrict access to care, particularly because Medicaid provider payments are already well below payments from Medicare and private insurers for the same services. Because people of color disproportionately use Medicaid for their health coverage, a block grant or per capita cap and the resulting cuts would deepen inequities in coverage, access to health services, and health care quality across racial and ethnic groups. [18]

Lowering Medicaid Matching Rates

State budgets depend on federal Medicaid matching funds. Reducing some or all states’ Medicaid matching rates, as Project 2025 and both the RSC and HBC budgets propose, would undermine Medicaid’s financing and drive deep cuts to state Medicaid programs.

Today, the federal government pays between 50 percent and 77 percent of the cost of providing most health services to most Medicaid enrollees. The federal share is generally higher in states with lower per capita income than in states with higher per capita income, reflecting the fact that higher-income states can afford to pay a larger share of Medicaid costs. [19] As a result, the federal government pays a larger share of program costs in states with lower average income. Some services, such as family planning, are matched at a 90 percent enhanced rate in all states, as are services for people newly covered by the ACA’s Medicaid expansion.

The RSC budget would replace the long-standing matching rate formula with a 50 percent rate for all states. This would shrink the federal government’s commitment to sharing in Medicaid costs in the 40 states and the District of Columbia that would otherwise have a standard Medicaid matching rate over 50 percent in fiscal year 2025. [20] (U.S. territories presumably would face a cut as well, since their matching rates now exceed 50 percent.) The HBC proposes to reduce only the District of Columbia’s regular matching rate. Both proposals would eliminate the enhanced matching rate for the Medicaid expansion, likely leading states to cut millions of people who newly gained coverage under the expansion, or to perhaps substitute less robust, more expensive private market coverage for comprehensive Medicaid coverage for some enrollees.

Project 2025 proposes reducing the enhanced expansion matching rate but is less clear about how it would cut the regular matching rate, simply calling for a “more balanced or blended matching rate.” [21] One recent proposal by the Paragon Health Institute provides clues about what conservative policymakers might suggest. [22] As part of a broader plan to overhaul Medicaid, Paragon has proposed phasing out the 90 percent matching rate for expansion enrollees and changing the federal matching rate formula to drop the minimum regular matching rate from 50 percent to 40 percent, which would result in a cut for ten states as well as the District of Columbia. [23]

The Paragon proposal also would let states that maintain the Medicaid expansion despite the significant funding reduction move people with incomes over 100 percent of the federal poverty level from Medicaid to the marketplace. Without extra financial assistance, individuals with such low incomes are not likely to be able to afford coverage. That’s especially true given that the Paragon Institute also suggests ending the premium tax credit improvements that make marketplace coverage more affordable.

By Paragon’s own estimate, its proposals would cut federal Medicaid spending by $592.4 billion over ten years. The report, however, fails to consider additional ways in which states would certainly cut benefits, eligibility, or provider rates to balance their budgets if federal support is cut to the degree Paragon proposes, making the potential impact much greater. [24]

Eliminating Provider Taxes, Which Help Support State Medicaid Programs

Today, states have flexibility in how they finance the non-federal share of Medicaid matching funds. States must only follow Medicaid law and regulations designed to ensure that they contribute a minimum amount of support to the program, do not use federal Medicaid dollars as the source of the non-federal share, and use federal funds to serve Medicaid enrollees. Project 2025 and the RSC budget would disrupt these rules in an effort to further reduce Medicaid spending.

Both proposals aim to restrict — or, in the words of the RSC budget, “effectively eliminate” — health care taxes on providers. All states except Alaska use provider taxes to help finance a portion of the state Medicaid share. In recent years, states have used new or increased provider taxes to help pay for adjusting provider reimbursements to keep pace with increases in health costs, averting Medicaid benefit cuts, and expanding Medicaid benefits, including supporting the ACA Medicaid expansion. [25]

Restricting or ending states’ ability to use these revenues would create a hole in state budgets and have serious consequences for Medicaid enrollees. [26] Eliminating provider taxes would cut $526 billion in federal Medicaid spending over ten years, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has estimated, as the likely state Medicaid cuts would reduce federal matching payments; that $526 billion represents 8.7 percent of federal spending on Medicaid over this time period. The total Medicaid cut, including the decline in state spending, would be significantly larger. [27] Project 2025 may also eliminate other approaches that states use to generate the necessary non-federal share of Medicaid funds: the use of public funds transferred from or certified by other entities, such as local governments and public hospitals.

It is unlikely that states could fill the gap from limiting these revenue-raising options. Instead, they would cut benefits or eligibility, cut provider rates, or otherwise limit health care access for Medicaid beneficiaries.

Dismantling the ACA Medicaid Expansion

The Project 2025, RSC, and HBC proposals would gut the ACA’s Medicaid expansion by eliminating the higher expansion matching rate, block-granting expansion funding, or both. [28]

The ACA expanded Medicaid to adults with household incomes up to 138 percent of the poverty level ($20,783 a year for an individual). The Supreme Court later made the expansion optional. Forty states plus the District of Columbia have expanded Medicaid, filling a critical gap in coverage for nearly 18 million adults aged 19 to 64 who would otherwise lack an affordable source of health care coverage. [29] As noted above, the ACA provided a 90 percent federal matching rate for this population, assuming most of the cost of expansion — similar to the federal government’s assumption of the full cost of providing premium tax credit assistance for ACA marketplace coverage.

Dismantling the Medicaid expansion would drive an unprecedented increase in the uninsured rate, as many current expansion enrollees would have no alternative source of affordable coverage. In addition, evidence from a decade of implementation shows that the Medicaid expansion has led to important gains not only for newly eligible adults but also for children, older adults, and people with disabilities. These groups are traditionally eligible for Medicaid, but some individuals may not have realized they qualified until the expansion simplified Medicaid eligibility rules and generated a “welcome mat” effect. [30] If the ACA’s Medicaid expansion ends, over time some people in these groups may also lose coverage as the simple message that people with low incomes are eligible for Medicaid is replaced by the more complicated structure prior to expansion, when only certain groups of people with low incomes qualified. Reduced coverage for parents, in particular, has been shown to lead to fewer eligible children enrolling.

The ACA’s Medicaid expansion also reduced the burden that uncompensated care places on state, local, and hospital budgets and improved hospital operating margins, particularly for rural and safety net hospitals. [31] States have also realized budget savings and revenue gains as a result of the expansion, and providers have reported overall positive financial impacts. [32] Undermining the Medicaid expansion would lead to an increase in uncompensated care and leave millions of people nationwide without an affordable health care option.

Gutting Protections for Medicaid Enrollees

A hallmark of Medicaid coverage is its strong protections for enrollees. Robust benefit packages and little to no out-of-pocket costs are essential to appropriately serving people with low incomes, who often struggle to meet their basic needs for housing, food, and health care. In addition to the funding threats described above, which would drive cuts to eligibility and benefits, all three proposals include policies that would prevent Medicaid enrollees from getting needed care.

The proposals would:

Take coverage away from people who do not meet harsh work requirements. All three plans would take Medicaid coverage away from people who do not meet a work requirement. [33] Experiments in Arkansas’ Medicaid program [34] and policies in other public benefit programs [35] show that work requirements not only fail to increase employment but also kick many people off coverage due to excessive red tape and paperwork. Georgia is the only state currently implementing work requirements for a portion of its Medicaid population, and the primary effect appears to be keeping people out of coverage. [36]

Work requirements are based on the false assumption that people who receive benefits will only work if compelled to do so. This assumption is rooted in stereotypes based on race, gender, disability status, and class. It ignores the realities of the low-paid labor market, ongoing labor market discrimination, the lack of child care and paid sick and family leave, and the impact of health issues, disabilities, and the need to care for family members on people’s ability to work at various times. [37] Most people enrolled in Medicaid either work or would qualify for an exemption from work requirements, [38] but complex administrative barriers make it difficult to claim such exemptions and the reporting regimes are complicated and error-ridden, keeping yet more people out of coverage.

• Increase consumer costs. Today, Medicaid strictly limits how much enrollees can be required to pay out of pocket, with caps on co-pays, prohibitions on co-pays for children and pregnant enrollees, prohibitions on charging premiums to people under 150 percent of the poverty level, and limits on allowable premium amounts for people above that income level. [39] The Project 2025 blueprint guts these protections.
• Expose Medicaid enrollees to higher-cost private coverage. Both the RSC and Project 2025 plans would permit the use of Medicaid dollars to buy private coverage. Project 2025 would let enrollees buy catastrophic coverage combined with a health savings account-style account, which would leave them with skimpier coverage and higher out-of-pocket costs than they now have through Medicaid. The RSC budget would apparently let states reallocate block grant funding for low-income adults to provide subsidies to adults who can show they meet a work requirement to buy private coverage. This coverage would likely be less comprehensive and more costly than the Medicaid benefits now available to parents and to low-income adults covered through the Medicaid expansion.
• Cut people off coverage by imposing lifetime limits . In addition to weakening coverage, the Project 2025 plan would put unspecified time limits or lifetime caps on coverage. In an economy where many jobs do not include affordable health coverage or pay living wages sufficient to cover child care costs and other work support necessities, denying coverage for some or all enrollees who reach such limits would be counterproductive; the policy would drive up the number of people who are uninsured and increase uncompensated care costs, since people’s health needs won’t go away. In fact, coverage time limits are likely to make people sicker, diminish their ability to hold down jobs, and add to economic instability. [40] Time limits would have a particularly negative impact on people with disabilities and chronic conditions unless they are exempted.

Leave people worse off and expose them to new costs by weakening Medicaid benefits. Project 2025 would severely reshape Medicaid’s long-standing and robust benefit package by eliminating benefits that exceed those provided in the private market. Most notably, this could threaten the robust Early Periodic Screening, Diagnostic and Treatment (EPSDT) benefit that children are entitled to. It could also threaten long-term services and supports, both institutional services and home- and community-based services.

Project 2025 would also rescind provisions in recent section 1115 demonstrations (or waivers) that authorize states to provide non-traditional services to help address people’s unmet health-related social needs. Allowing Medicaid to support time-limited nutritional and housing-related needs can help improve Medicaid enrollees’ health; these new projects should be carefully evaluated, not eliminated. [41]

• Incentivize states to erect barriers to Medicaid eligibility. Project 2025 and the HBC both cite concerns about program integrity and propose more arduous eligibility verification and determination procedures that would make it harder for eligible people to enroll or to stay enrolled in Medicaid. Improper payments in Medicaid typically don’t result from fraud or abuse but rather from state procedural mistakes caused by shortcomings in the eligibility system or documentation errors by overwhelmed eligibility workers. [42] Program integrity efforts should therefore focus on how well state systems function so that people who are eligible can get and stay enrolled — not on keeping eligible people out of Medicaid. [43] For example, ensuring that states are in compliance with long-standing eligibility rules that maximize reliance on electronic data sources can both improve accuracy and minimize burdens on applicants and enrollees.
• Weaken oversight by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Project 2025 calls for weakening CMS oversight of state Medicaid programs by letting states make payment reforms and other changes without seeking federal approval. Devolving the balance of responsibility for Medicaid program management to states would remove an important underpinning of Medicaid’s state-federal partnership: states receive federal funding in exchange for complying with minimum standards set by the federal government, including covering all individuals who meet eligibility requirements and providing them with certain minimum benefits. Giving budget-strapped states expanded authority to cut back health services and eligibility — and then reducing oversight of the remaining federal protections — would leave people who need Medicaid unprotected if states fail to meet program standards or make changes that restrict access to services.

Proposals Would Undermine ACA Marketplace Coverage

The ACA transformed people’s access to comprehensive individual health coverage. Today, more than 20 million people are enrolled in ACA marketplace coverage. But both Project 2025 and the RSC budget would weaken or eliminate key consumer and financial protections introduced by the ACA, further fragmenting the U.S. health care system, raising costs for millions of people, and reducing the number of people with health coverage. Rather than improving health coverage, these proposals would expand tax shelters for the wealthy and bring back challenges that people faced when trying to buy health coverage before the ACA was enacted. [44] These proposals attempt to dismantle the ACA piecemeal, with many of the same likely effects as prior ACA repeal proposals: more uninsured people and higher costs, especially for people with health conditions who need coverage the most.

The ACA set up online marketplaces where people can compare and enroll in coverage, and it provided income-based financial assistance for marketplace coverage. It also set standards for individual health coverage (whether or not it is provided through the marketplace), prohibiting insurers from denying people coverage, raising their premiums, or excluding certain benefits because of a pre-existing condition.

The ACA marketplaces have contributed to a decrease in uninsurance, particularly among people who are Black or Latino or have low incomes. They have also served as an important source of coverage for self-employed people, employees of small businesses, and others who do not have access to affordable health coverage through an employer, Medicare, or Medicaid. [45]

And thanks to recent improvements to the premium tax credits (PTCs), marketplace plans are more affordable than ever before, with 90 percent of enrollees qualifying for some financial assistance and 51 percent of enrollees paying $10 per month or less for their health coverage. [46] These affordability improvements have increased marketplace enrollment from 12 million in 2021 to 21 million in 2024, with the greatest gains occurring among Black, Latino, and low-income people. [47] Public opinion research shows broad support across party lines for the ACA’s protections for people with pre-existing conditions and its limits on out-of-pocket spending. [48]

Reducing Marketplace Financial Help, Raising People’s Premiums

The RSC and HBC plans would raise people’s costs in the ACA marketplaces by reducing the financial assistance that most marketplace enrollees receive to reduce their premiums, deductibles, and other costs under comprehensive health insurance plans.

The RSC and HBC plans call for ending the PTC improvements that have been in place since 2021. [49] This would cause nearly all marketplace enrollees to face significantly higher premium costs; for example, a typical 60-year-old couple making $80,000 (405 percent of the poverty level) would see their premiums more than triple, to over $24,000 per year. [50] An estimated 4 million people would become uninsured as their premiums rose to unaffordable levels, with the greatest coverage losses occurring among Black and Hispanic people in states that have not expanded Medicaid. [51] The PTC improvements are set to expire after 2025 without congressional action.

Beyond rejecting the PTC improvements, the RSC also calls for eliminating the PTCs entirely as part of its proposal to convert federal funding streams for existing health coverage programs into state block grants for Medicaid and high-risk pools (discussed below). While Project 2025 does not explicitly mention changes to the PTCs in its policy agenda, it criticizes federal marketplace financial assistance and references a separate Heritage Foundation paper that calls for establishing capped federal allotments for states in place of the current ACA subsidies. [52] Either proposal would lead to even greater coverage losses than eliminating the PTC improvements, increase people’s premium costs even further, and throw insurance markets into disarray.

Dismantling Core ACA Protections, Undermining ACA Marketplaces

The RSC budget and Project 2025 resurrect proposals similar to the highly unpopular 2017 ACA repeal bills [53] but downplay harmful effects on people with pre-existing conditions. These proposals would create an environment where people with health conditions would pay higher premiums and out-of-pocket costs for less substantial coverage than is currently available. [54] Given the increase in costs, more people would enroll in subpar plans that leave them exposed to high costs if they get sick. These changes would disproportionately harm Black people, who are more likely to have common chronic conditions due to racial inequities in social, economic, and political factors. For example, Black people are more likely to live in proximity to waste management facilities, power plants, and other sources of toxic exposure that lead to health problems due to discriminatory housing policies that have limited their access to neighborhoods with fewer environmental hazards. [55]

Specifically, these proposals would:

Eviscerate federal protections for people with pre-existing conditions. The RSC and Project 2025 plans would roll back federal insurance protections in favor of separating healthy people and those with pre-existing conditions into different insurance markets that operate under different rules.

The RSC proposal would allow insurers to charge higher premiums to people with pre-existing conditions and exclude certain benefits from the plans they can buy. [56] People with chronic and complex conditions would receive coverage through separate state-run high-risk pools. Such high-risk pools existed prior to the ACA and had high premiums, gaps in benefits, and limited enrollment because of their expense. [57] To save money, nearly all state high-risk pools excluded coverage of pre-existing conditions for people with high-cost medical issues, usually for the first six to 12 months of enrollment. [58]

Project 2025 proposes “separat[ing] the non-subsidized [individual] insurance market from the subsidized [individual] market” and “giving the non-subsidized market regulatory relief from the costly ACA regulatory mandates.” Though the plan provides no details about which regulatory mandates it would eliminate, the paper it cites supports an approach that would roll back ACA benefits standards, let insurers raise premiums for older people compared to younger people, and eliminate the “single risk pool” requirement that requires each insurer to price their individual-market plans based on all their enrollees. [59] Creating a separate, deregulated market would lead people with fewer health needs to migrate to deregulated off-marketplace plans that offer less expensive coverage; people with more health needs would remain in the marketplace’s comprehensive coverage and would experience higher premiums due to its sicker risk pool. If coupled with cutting and then eliminating premium tax credits, these changes would likely result in far higher costs for ACA marketplace coverage and thus fewer people with health conditions covered.

Allow states to further deregulate their individual insurance markets. The RSC proposes to bring back medical underwriting — the ability for insurers to charge higher premiums or exclude certain benefits from plans purchased by people with pre-existing conditions. [60]

States would be allowed to enact consumer protections similar to those in place today, but they were free to do so before the ACA — and few did. Robust protections for people with pre-existing conditions weren’t sustainable for most states before federal PTCs were available to keep premiums affordable.

Expand the availability of health plans that are currently exempt from consumer protections. Both Project 2025 and the RSC budget would expand subpar plans, such as association health plans and short-term, limited duration insurance, which are exempt from many of the ACA’s core consumer protections. [61] The RSC plan would let people enroll in short-term plans for 12 months instead of three, and both the RSC and Project 2025 proposals would allow small firms with healthier and younger employees and self-employed individuals to enroll in association health plans as a way of avoiding risk-pooling and other ACA reforms that apply to the small-group and individual insurance markets.

Expanding subpar plans in this way would weaken the ACA marketplace by drawing healthier individuals into alternative coverage arrangements. This is another strategy that would lead people with fewer expected health needs away from the ACA marketplace’s comprehensive health plans, resulting in a sicker risk pool and higher premiums in the ACA marketplace. [62]

• Roll back federal protections that explicitly prohibit insurers and health care providers from discriminating against people based on their sexual orientation, gender identity, or pregnancy status. Section 1557 of the ACA prohibits Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) programs, as well as programs that receive HHS funding (including Medicaid and ACA marketplace insurers), from discriminating against members of certain protected groups. Project 2025 would end these protections for LGBTQ+ individuals, pregnant people, and people who have had an abortion.

Expanding Programs That Primarily Benefit Wealthy People

Both Project 2025 and the RSC budget aim to expand the use of health savings accounts (HSAs). In an HSA arrangement, individuals enroll in a high-deductible health plan and elect to transfer pre-tax dollars into an account that can be withdrawn tax free to pay for certain out-of-pocket health care expenses. In some cases, employers contribute to these accounts as well. While proponents of HSAs argue that these arrangements encourage wiser health care spending by giving people “skin in the game,” there is ample evidence that they lead to decreased use of care, particularly among low-income people.

HSAs can serve as lucrative tax shelters and investment vehicles for wealthy people, who can afford to contribute large sums into HSA accounts and who benefit more from the accounts’ tax advantaged status, as they are in higher marginal income tax brackets. In contrast, people with low or moderate incomes often cannot afford to put significant funds into savings, need to use any available income for upfront medical costs, or struggle with medical debt. [63]

Additionally, the RSC budget would change how HSAs and individual coverage health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs) can be used. [64] Currently, employers can choose to contribute to an individual coverage HRA, which an employee can then use to pay for premiums and/or medical expenses if they are enrolled in an individual market plan. The RSC proposal would allow HSAs and individual coverage HRAs to pay for non-insurance products such as health care sharing ministries and direct primary care arrangements. [65] These arrangements, which are often marketed as alternatives to comprehensive coverage, in fact cover far fewer benefits and may leave people exposed to catastrophic medical costs if they get sick. [66]

More on this topic

House republican agendas and project 2025 would increase poverty and hardship, drive up the uninsured rate, and disinvest from people, communities, and the economy, medicaid expansion helps newly eligible adults and groups traditionally eligible for medicaid, closing medicaid coverage gap would help diverse groups and reduce inequities, health insurance costs will rise steeply if premium tax credit improvements expire, policy basics health.

• Federal Payroll Taxes
• Introduction to Medicaid

[1] Project 2025 Presidential Transition Project, “Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise,” 2023, https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf . (Hereinafter Project 2025)

[2] Republican Study Committee, “Fiscal Sanity to Save America: Republican Study Committee FY 2025 Budget Proposal,” March 20, 2024, https://hern.house.gov/uploadedfiles/final_budget_including_letter_word_doc-final_as_of_march_25.pdf . (Hereinafter RSC budget proposal)

[3] House of Representatives Committee on the Budget, “Concurrent Resolution on the Budget — Fiscal Year 2025, Report to Accompany H. Con. Res. 117,” June 27, 2024, https://www.congress.gov/congressional-report/118th-congress/house-report/568/1?outputFormat=pdf . (Hereinafter HBC report)

[4] CBPP staff, “House Republican Agendas and Project 2025 Would Increase Poverty and Hardship, Drive Up the Uninsured Rate, and Disinvest From People, Communities, and the Economy,” September 3, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/house-republican-agendas-and-project-2025-would-increase-poverty-and .

[5] See pp. 96 and 176 of the RSC budget proposal.

[6] See pp. 11 and 44-45 of the HBC report. CBPP calculations relative to CBO’s February 2024 baseline. As noted, the cuts could also affect CHIP and ACA marketplace coverage, but the accompanying report discusses cuts only to Medicaid.

[7] Jennifer Sullivan, Allison Orris, and Gideon Lukens, “Entering their Second Decade, Affordable Care Act Coverage Expansions Have Helped Millions, Provide the Basis for Further Progress,” CBPP, updated March 25, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/entering-their-second-decade-affordable-care-act-coverage-expansions-have-helped .

[8] Breanna Sharer and Gideon Lukens, “Health Coverage Rates Vary Widely Across — and Within — Racial and Ethnic Groups,” CBPP, May 9, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/files/5-9-24health.pdf .

[9] Kaylin Hewitt, “Reviewing How the Affordable Care Act Improved the Health Coverage Landscape,” CBPP, July 18, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/reviewing-how-the-affordable-care-act-improved-the-health-coverage-landscape .

[10] Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, “May 2024 Medicaid & CHIP Enrollment Data Highlights,” https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/program-information/medicaid-and-chip-enrollment-data/report-highlights/index.html .

[11] KFF, “Births Financed by Medicaid,” 2022, https://www.kff.org/medicaid/state-indicator/births-financed-by-medicaid/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D .

[12] Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission, “Access in Brief: Behavioral Health and Beneficiary Satisfaction by Race and Ethnicity,” January 2024, https://www.macpac.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Access-in-Brief-Behavioral-Health-and-Beneficiary-Satisfaction-by-Race-and-Ethnicity.pdf .

[13] Barring states from providing Medicaid funds to medical professionals who provide abortions would cause thousands of people with low incomes to lose access to care and raise state and federal Medicaid costs related to unplanned pregnancies. Judith Solomon, “Defunding Planned Parenthood Would Leave Thousands of Women Without Care,” CBPP, January 3, 2017, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/defunding-planned-parenthood-would-leave-thousands-of-women-without-care .

[14] National Association of State Budget Officers, “2023 State Expenditure Report,” 2023, https://www.nasbo.org/reports-data/state-expenditure-report .

[15] Edwin Park, “Medicaid Block Grant Would Slash Federal Funding, Shift Costs to States, and Leave Millions More Uninsured,” CBPP, November 30, 2016, https://www.cbpp.org/research/medicaid-block-grant-would-slash-federal-funding-shift-costs-to-states-and-leave-millions .

[16] Per capita cap proposals establish a limit on how much the federal government will spend on Medicaid on a per-person basis. See, e.g., Gideon Lukens and Allison Orris, “Changing Medicaid’s Funding Structure to a Per Capita Cap Would Shift Costs to States, Force Deep Cuts, and Leave Millions Uninsured,” CBPP, March 27, 2023, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/changing-medicaids-funding-structure-to-a-per-capita-cap-would-shift-costs-to ; Edwin Park, “Medicaid Per Capita Cap Would Shift Costs and Risks to States and Harm Millions of Beneficiaries,” CBPP, revised February 27, 2017, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/medicaid-per-capita-cap-would-shift-costs-and-risks-to-states-and-harm-millions-of .

[17] See, e.g., Sarah Lueck and Allison Orris, “Congressional Republicans’ Budget Plans Are Likely to Cut Health Coverage,” CBPP, updated March 20, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/congressional-republicans-budget-plans-are-likely-to-cut-health-coverage ; Park, “Medicaid Block Grant Would Slash Federal Funding, Shift Costs to States, and Leave Millions More Uninsured,” op. cit .

[18] Lukens and Orris, op. cit.

[19] KFF, “Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) for Medicaid and Multiplier,” FY 2024, https://www.kff.org/medicaid/state-indicator/federal-matching-rate-and-multiplier/?currentTimeframe=1&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22FMAP%20Percentage%22,%22sort%22:%22desc%22%7D .

[20] KFF, “Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) for Medicaid and Multiplier,” FY 2025, https://www.kff.org/medicaid/state-indicator/federal-matching-rate-and-multiplier/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D .

[21] Project 2025, op. cit., p. 466.

[22] A former Paragon Health Institute staff member is listed as a contributor to the Project 2025 report, and current Paragon leadership and staff have worked for both the Trump Administration and Republican congressional offices.

[23] Brian Blase and Drew Gonshorowski, “Medicaid Financing Reform: Stopping Discrimination Against the Most Vulnerable and Reducing Bias Favoring Wealthy States,” Paragon Health Institute, July 2024, https://paragoninstitute.org/medicaid/medicaid-financing-reform-stopping-discrimination-against-the-most-vulnerable-and-reducing-bias-favoring-wealthy-states/ .

[24] For a discussion of some of the factors that the Paragon report fails to consider, see Joan Alker and Edwin Park, “Another Sign that Trump 2 Will Target Medicaid for Deep, Damaging Cuts,” Georgetown University Center for Children and Families, July 24, 2024, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2024/07/24/another-sign-that-trump-2-will-target-medicaid-for-deep-damaging-cuts/ .

[25] KFF, “States With At Least One Provider Tax in Place: SFY 2004 - SFY 2023,” https://www.kff.org/medicaid/state-indicator/states-with-at-least-one-provider-tax-in-place/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D .

[26] Edwin Park, “Limiting State Provider Taxes Would Shift Costs to States and Weaken Medicaid,” CBPP, updated March 16, 2016, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/limiting-state-provider-taxes-would-shift-costs-to-states-and-weaken-medicaid .

[27] Congressional Budget Office, “Limit State Taxes on Health Care Providers,” December 7, 2022, https://www.cbo.gov/budget-options/58623 ; CBO, “The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2022 to 2032,” May 2022, https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58147 .

[28] As noted above, the Paragon Health Institute also proposes to cut the enhanced Medicaid expansion matching rate. Blase and Gonshorowski, op. cit.

[29] CMS, “Quarterly Medicaid Enrollment Data – New Adult Group, October-December 2023 Medicaid MBES Enrollment,” https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/national-medicaid-chip-program-information/medicaid-chip-enrollment-data/medicaid-enrollment-data-collected-through-mbes/index.html . The most recent data are from December 2023; enrollment in the new adult group has likely declined since then due to unwinding.

[30] Laura Harker, “Medicaid Expansion Helps Newly Eligible Adults and Groups Traditionally Eligible for Medicaid,” CBPP, June 3, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/medicaid-expansion-helps-newly-eligible-adults-and-groups-traditionally-eligible . The “welcome mat” effect refers to enrollment increases among people who were previously eligible for coverage but not enrolled, following an eligibility expansion to a different group.

[31] Meghana Ammula and Madeline Guth, “What Does the Recent Literature Say about Medicaid Expansion?: Economic Impacts on Providers,” KFF, January 18, 2023, https://www.kff.org/medicaid/issue-brief/what-does-the-recent-literature-say-about-medicaid-expansion-economic-impacts-on-providers/ .

[32] Laura Harker and Breanna Sharer, “Medicaid Expansion: Frequently Asked Questions,” CBPP, updated June 14, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/medicaid-expansion-frequently-asked-questions-0 .

[33] The HBC report explicitly references the Limit, Save, Grow Act of 2023, which — even with exemptions for certain populations — would have resulted in massive coverage losses. Gideon Lukens, “McCarthy Medicaid Proposal Puts Millions of People in Expansion States at Risk of Losing Health Coverage,” CBPP, April 21, 2023, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/mccarthy-medicaid-proposal-puts-millions-of-people-in-expansion-states-at-risk-of .

[34] Laura Harker, “Pain But No Gain: Arkansas’ Failed Medicaid Work-Reporting Requirements Should Not Be a Model,” CBPP, August 8, 2023, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/pain-but-no-gain-arkansas-failed-medicaid-work-reporting-requirements-should-not-be .

[35] LaDonna Pavetti et al., “Expanding Work Requirements Would Make It Harder for People to Meet Basic Needs,” CBPP, March 15, 2023, https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-and-inequality/expanding-work-requirements-would-make-it-harder-for-people-to-meet .

[36] Laura Harker, “6 Months Into Georgia Pathways Program, Over 400,000 People Still Lack Health Coverage; Expanding Medicaid Would Improve Access for Low-Income Georgians,” CBPP, January 25, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/6-months-into-georgia-pathways-program-over-400000-people-still-lack-health-coverage-expanding .

[37] Laura Harker, “Taking Medicaid Away for Not Meeting a Work-Reporting Requirement Would Keep People From Health Care,” CBPP, April 28, 2023, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/taking-medicaid-away-for-not-meeting-a-work-reporting-requirement-would-keep-people .

[38] Madeline Guth et al ., “Understanding the Intersection of Medicaid & Work: A Look at What the Data Say,” KFF, April 24, 2023, https://www.kff.org/medicaid/issue-brief/understanding-the-intersection-of-medicaid-work-a-look-at-what-the-data-say/ .

[39] For a discussion about how increasing out-of-pocket costs can harm enrollees, see Hannah Katch, “Wisconsin Imposing Nation’s Harshest Medicaid Premiums on People in Poverty,” CBPP, January 29, 2020, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/wisconsin-imposing-nations-harshest-medicaid-premiums-on-people-in-poverty .

[40] Natasha Murphy, “Project 2025 Medicaid Lifetime Cap Proposal Threatens Health Care Coverage for up to 18.5 Million Americans,” Center for American Progress, June 20, 2024, https://www.americanprogress.org/article/project-2025-medicaid-lifetime-cap-proposal-threatens-health-care-coverage-for-up-to-18-5-million-americans/ .

[41] Allison Orris, Anna Bailey, and Jennifer Sullivan, “States Can Use Medicaid to Help Address Health-Related Social Needs,” CBPP, updated February 27, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/states-can-use-medicaid-to-help-address-health-related-social-needs .

[42] Jessica Schubel, “Medicaid Improper Payment Rates Don’t Signal Fraud or Abuse,” CBPP, November 19, 2020, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/medicaid-improper-payment-rates-dont-signal-fraud-or-abuse .

[43] CBPP, “Medicaid: Compliance With Eligibility Requirements,” testimony of Senior Fellow Judith Solomon before the Senate Finance Subcommittee on Health Care, October, 30, 2019, https://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/js-testimony-10-30-19.pdf .

[44] Kaylin Hewitt, “Reviewing How the Affordable Care Act Improved the Health Coverage Landscape,” CBPP, July 18, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/reviewing-how-the-affordable-care-act-improved-the-health-coverage-landscape .

[45] Department of Health and Human Services, “Health Insurance Marketplaces: 10 Years of Affordable Private Plan Options,” March 22, 2024, https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/00d1eccb776ac4abde9979aa793e2c7a/aspe-10-years-of-marketplace.pdf ; Gideon Lukens, “ACA Drove Record Coverage Gains for Small-Business and Self-Employed Workers,” CBPP, July 17, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/aca-drove-record-coverage-gains-for-small-business-and-self-employed-workers .

[46] CMS, “Health Insurance Marketplaces 2024 Open Enrollment Report,” https://www.cms.gov/files/document/health-insurance-exchanges-2024-open-enrollment-report-final.pdf .

[47] Department of Health and Human Services, op. cit.; Jared Ortaleza et al., “Inflation Reduction Act Health Insurance Subsidies: What is Their Impact and What Would Happen if They Expire?” KFF, July 26, 2024, https://www.kff.org/affordable-care-act/issue-brief/inflation-reduction-act-health-insurance-subsidies-what-is-their-impact-and-what-would-happen-if-they-expire/ .

[48] Ashley Kirzinger et al ., “5 Charts About Public Opinion on the Affordable Care Act,” KFF, February 22, 2024, https://www.kff.org/affordable-care-act/poll-finding/5-charts-about-public-opinion-on-the-affordable-care-act/ .

[49] The Paragon Health Institute has also called for eliminating the improved PTCs, among other changes that would result in significant coverage loss. See: Paragon Health Institute, “The Great Obamacare Enrollment Fraud,” June 20, 2024, https://paragoninstitute.org/private-health/the-great-obamacare-enrollment-fraud/ .

[50] This estimate is based on age-adjusted 2024 average benchmark premiums and 2023 poverty guidelines, which are used to determine premium tax credits for 2024 marketplace coverage. Gideon Lukens, “Health Insurance Costs Will Rise Steeply if Premium Tax Credit Improvements Expire,” CBPP, June 4, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/health-insurance-costs-will-rise-steeply-if-premium-tax-credit-improvements-expire .

[51] Jessica Banthin, Michael Simpson, and Mohammed Akel, “The Impact of Enhanced Premium Tax Credits on Coverage by Race and Ethnicity,” Urban Institute, August 12, 2024, https://www.urban.org/research/publication/impact-enhanced-premium-tax-credits-coverage-race-and-ethnicity .

[52] Edmund F. Haislmaier and Abigail Slagle, “Premiums, Choices, Deductibles, Care Access, and Government Dependence Under the Affordable Care Act: 2021 State-by-State Review,” Heritage Foundation, November 2, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2021-11/BG3668.pdf .

[53] Ashley Kirzinger et al ., “Kaiser Health Tracking Poll - June 2017: ACA, Replacement Plan, and Medicaid,” KFF, June 23, 2017, https://www.kff.org/affordable-care-act/poll-finding/kaiser-health-tracking-poll-june-2017-aca-replacement-plan-and-medicaid/ .

[54] Sarah Lueck, “Eliminating Federal Protections for People with Health Conditions Would Mean Return to Dysfunctional Pre-ACA Individual Market,” CBPP, October 5, 2020, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/eliminating-federal-protections-for-people-with-health-conditions-would-mean-return ; Jacob Leibenluft, Aviva Aron-Dine, and Edwin Park, “CBO Continues to Show Millions Would Pay More for Less Under House Republican Health Bill,” CBPP, May 25, 2017, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/cbo-continues-to-show-millions-would-pay-more-for-less-under-house-republican .

[55] Nambi Ndugga, Latoya Hill, and Samantha Artiga, “Key Data on Health and Health Care by Race and Ethnicity,” KFF, June 11, 2023, https://www.kff.org/key-data-on-health-and-health-care-by-race-and-ethnicity ; Justin Steil and Mariana Arcaya, “Residential Segregation And Health: History, Harms, And Next Steps,” Health Affairs, April 27, 2023, https://www.healthaffairs.org/content/briefs/residential-segregation-and-health-history-harms-and-next-steps .

[56] While the RSC proposal says insurers would not be allowed to rescind coverage, exclude benefits, or increase premiums if a person develops a health condition after enrollment , it is less explicit about protections for people who have known pre-existing conditions before they enroll in coverage.

[57] Edwin Park, “Trump, House GOP High-Risk Pool Proposals a Failed Approach,” CBPP, November 17, 2016, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/trump-house-gop-high-risk-pool-proposals-a-failed-approach .

[58] Karen Pollitz, “High-Risk Pools for Uninsurable Individuals,” KFF, February 22, 2017, https://www.kff.org/affordable-care-act/issue-brief/high-risk-pools-for-uninsurable-individuals/ .

[59] Project 2025 cites Haislmaier and Slagle, op. cit. The Heritage paper does not specify which regulatory mandates it seeks relief from, but directs readers to the following source for additional information: Health Policy Consensus Group, “Health Care Choices 2020: A Vision for the Future,” October 20, 2020, https://www.healthcarechoices2020.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/HEALTH-CARE-CHOICES-2020_A-Vision-for-the-Future_FINAL-002-1.pdf .

[60] Under the RSC plan, the federal requirement for insurers in the individual market to issue coverage regardless of health status would be “retailored.” The plan references a proposal allowing insurers to exclude coverage of existing health conditions for up to 12 months for people who have not maintained “continuous” health coverage. See Republican Study Committee, “A Framework for Personalized, Affordable Care,” https://rsc-hern.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicanstudycommittee.house.gov/files/FINAL%20RSC%20Health%20Care%20Report.pdf .

[61] Americans for Prosperity, a conservative, libertarian think tank, also supports policies that would increase the availability of short-term, limited duration insurance and association health plans. Americans for Prosperity, “Our Personal Option Health Care Vision for Lawmakers,” https://personaloption.com/personalized-healthcare-vision-for-lawmakers/ .

[62] Sarah Lueck, “Trump Proposal Expanding Short-Term Health Plans Would Harm Consumers,” CBPP, February 20, 2018, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/trump-proposal-expanding-short-term-health-plans-would-harm-consumers ; Sarah Lueck, “Association Health Plan Expansion Likely to Hurt Consumers, State Insurance Markets,” CBPP, March 7, 2019, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/association-health-plan-expansion-likely-to-hurt-consumers-state-insurance-markets .

[63] Gideon Lukens, “Expanding Health Savings Accounts Would Boost Tax Shelters, Not Access to Care,” CBPP, June 22, 2023, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/expanding-health-savings-accounts-would-boost-tax-shelters-not-access-to-care .

[64] Americans for Prosperity also advocates for the expansion of HSAs and the ability to use HRAs to purchase short-term health plans, which are exempt from a number of the ACA’s consumer protections. Americans for Prosperity, “Personal Option Policy Agenda,” https://personaloption.com/personal-option-healthcare-policy-better-options/ .

[65] Health care sharing ministries are arrangements wherein people with a common ethical or religious background contribute a monthly fee to pay for one another’s medical expenses; they can categorically exclude health services not considered aligned with the operators’ religious faiths, and they do not guarantee that they will reimburse health care providers for services provided, exposing members to substantial financial risk. Direct primary care arrangements charge members a subscription fee for primary care services.

[66] Sarah Lueck, “Tax Breaks for Alternatives to Insurance Would Drive More Coverage Gaps,” CBPP, August 1, 2019, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/tax-breaks-for-alternatives-to-insurance-would-drive-more-coverage-gaps .

More from the Authors

Areas of Expertise

Recent work:.

• New Federal Rules Will Improve Medicaid, CHIP Access Across the Country
• Entering Their Second Decade, Affordable Care Act Coverage Expansions Have Helped Millions, Provide the Basis for Further Progress

• Health Rules Boost ACA Standards, Access to Quality Coverage
• Next Round of ACA Improvements Should Focus on Marketplace Cost Sharing