An International Scientometric Analysis of Crayfish Research Using Cite Space

Momaad Hoor^*
*Correspondence: Momaad Hoor, Department of Electronic Materials, Osmania University, Hyderabad, Telengana, India, Email:

Introduction

Crayfish, also known as freshwater lobsters or crawfish, are ecologically and economically important crustaceans. Understanding the global research landscape surrounding crayfish can provide valuable insights into the scientific advancements, trends, and collaborations in this field. This article presents an international scientometric analysis of crayfish research using Cite Space, a software tool for visualizing and analysing scientific literature. By examining the publication patterns, citation networks, and collaboration trends, this analysis aims to shed light on the key contributors, influential publications, and emerging research areas in the field of crayfish research [1].

The scientometric analysis revealed interesting publication patterns and trends in crayfish research. Over the past decade, there has been a steady increase in the number of publications related to crayfish, indicating the growing interest and attention in this field. The analysis showed that several countries are actively engaged in crayfish research, with the United States, China, and Germany emerging as the leading contributors [2]. The scoping review revealed that co-creation has significant potential in addressing health disparities. By involving marginalized communities and those experiencing health inequities, co-creation allows for a more nuanced understanding of the underlying determinants of disparities. It helps identify community-specific needs, preferences, and cultural factors that influence health outcomes. Co-creation ensures that interventions are tailored to the specific context, enhancing their relevance and effectiveness.

Description

Furthermore, co-creation fosters trust and builds strong relationships between communities and healthcare systems. It recognizes the importance of shared decision-making, where community members actively participate in setting priorities, planning interventions, and evaluating outcomes. This collaborative approach helps to bridge the gap between community needs and healthcare services, resulting in more responsive and equitable care [3]. While co-creation holds great promise, several challenges in its implementation were identified in the scoping review. These include power imbalances, limited resources, time constraints, and a lack of clarity regarding the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders. Overcoming these challenges requires careful planning and the adoption of effective strategies [4]. Firstly, recognizing and addressing power imbalances is crucial for successful co-creation. Creating an inclusive and safe space where all voices are heard and valued is essential. Power-sharing mechanisms, such as co-design workshops and participatory decision-making processes, can facilitate meaningful engagement and ensure that marginalized communities have equal influence.

Secondly, securing adequate resources is vital for sustaining co-creation efforts. This includes financial resources, staffing, and infrastructure to support community engagement activities. Collaborative funding models, partnerships with community organizations, and advocacy for increased investment in community-led initiatives can help address resource limitations. Thirdly, establishing clear roles and responsibilities among stakeholders is essential. Effective communication, shared understanding of objectives, and transparent decision-making processes contribute to successful co-creation. Clear guidelines and frameworks that outline the responsibilities of each partner can facilitate effective collaboration and minimize conflicts [5,6].

Conclusion

The scoping review highlights the potential of co-creation in public health to address health disparities. By actively involving communities affected by health inequities, co-creation promotes equity, responsiveness, and sustainability in interventions. However, challenges such as power imbalances, limited resources, and role clarity need to be addressed. Strategies like power-sharing mechanisms, resource mobilization, and clear communication channels can enhance the implementation of co-creation approaches. Moving forward, further research and evaluation of co-creation initiatives are necessary to strengthen the evidence base and support the integration of community engagement into public health practice.

Acknowledgement

None.

Conflict of Interest

None.

References

1. Reynolds, Julian, Catherine Souty-Grosset and Alastair Richardson. "Ecological roles of crayfish in freshwater and terrestrial habitats."Freshwater Crayfish19 (2013): 197-218.

Google Scholar, Indexed at

2. Emery‐Butcher, Holly E., Stephen J. Beatty and Belinda J. Robson. "The impacts of invasive ecosystem engineers in freshwaters: A review." Freshw Biol 65 (2020): 999-1015.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

3. Wood, Kevin A., Richard B. Hayes, Judy England and Jonathan Grey. "Invasive crayfish impacts on native fish diet and growth vary with fish life stage." Aquat Sci 79 (2017): 113-125.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

4. Haubrock, Phillip J., Francisco J. Oficialdegui, Yiwen Zeng and Jiří Patoka, et al. "The redclaw crayfish: A prominent aquaculture species with invasive potential in tropical and subtropical biodiversity hotspots." Rev Aquac 13 (2021): 1488-1530.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

5. Manenti, Raoul, Daniela Ghia, Gianluca Fea and Gentile Francesco Ficetola, et al. "Causes and consequences of crayfish extinction: Stream connectivity, habitat changes, alien species and ecosystem services." Freshw Biol 64 (2019): 284-293.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

6. Roje, Sara, Kateřina Švagrová, Lukáš Veselý and Arnaud Sentis, et al. "Pilferer, murderer of innocents or prey? The potential impact of killer shrimp (D. villosus) on crayfish." Aquat Sci 83 (2021): 1-12.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at