⽬的：通過對國內外 COM-B 模型現有⽂獻進⾏⽂獻計量學分析，瞭解該領域的研究現狀、研究熱點以及發展趨勢，為中國學者更好地應⽤ COM-B 模型提供參考。⽅法：採⽤ CiteSpace 可視化分析軟體，對 Web of Science Core Collection（WoSCC）和中國知網（CNKI）中發表的相關⽂獻進⾏知識圖譜的可視化分析，時間限定為 2011 年 1 ⽉ 1 ⽇至 2025 年 4 ⽉ 10 ⽇。結果：共納入 1,106 篇⽂獻（英⽂⽂獻 954 篇、中⽂⽂獻 152 篇），2011 年至2025 年國內外發⽂量均呈整體上升趨勢，表現為前期發展緩慢，後期增長迅速的特點。受 COVID-19 疫情的影響，2020 年是發⽂量的爆發期。中⽂⽂獻的發⽂量相較於國際明顯不⾜，且機構間合作較少。研究主題上，慢性病患者的⾃我管理是國內外共同關注的議題︔研究⼈群上，國際研究覆蓋全⽣命週期，⽽中國研究主要聚焦於⽼年⼈和中青年︔聚焦疾病上，國際涉及廣泛，⽽中國側重單⼀疾病（腦卒中是重點關注對象）︔研究⽅法上，國際⼲預型研究發展成熟，⽽中國仍以橫斷⾯等描述性研究為主。根據突現詞結果顯⽰，未來國際研究主要集中在「oral health」、「disorder」、「health professional」以及「community pharmacy」，偏向基層衛⽣服務保障的探索︔中國的突現詞有「⼲預」、「質性研究」及「⼤學⽣」，提⽰中國未來研究⽅法向多元化⽅向發展。結論：全球 COM-B 模型研究的熱度持續攀升，⽽中國在該領域的研究起步相對較晚，仍具有廣闊的研究空間。

Objective: Through the bibliometric analysis of the existing literature on COM-B model at home and abroad, to ascertain the current research status, research hotspots and development trend in this field, which will provide reference for future research of Chinese scholars. Methods: CiteSpace visualization and analysis software were used to draw and analyze the visual maps of the literature related to COM-B model published on the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). The time limit was from January 1, 2011 to April 10, 2025. Results: A total of 1,106 literature (954 in English and 152 in Chinese) were included. From 2011 to 2025, both domestic and international publications exhibited an overall upward trend, characterised by slow initial development followed by rapid growth. The COVID-19 pandemic caused a surge in publication volume in 2020. Chinese literature remains significantly underrepresented compared to international output, with limited inter-institutional collaboration. Regarding research themes, self-management among chronic disease patients represents a shared focus globally. In terms of study populations, international research spans the entire lifespan, whereas Chinese studies predominantly concentrate on older people and middle-aged/young adults. Concerning disease focus, international research covers a broad spectrum, while Chinese studies emphasise single diseases (with stroke being a key area of attention). Methodologically, international intervention studies are well-developed, whereas China continues to rely primarily on cross-sectional and other descriptive research designs. Emergent word analysis indicates that future international research will concentrate on themes such as “oral health,” “mental health,” “health professionals,” and “community pharmacy services,” reflecting a shift towards exploring primary healthcare provision. China's emergent terms include “intervention,” “qualitative research,” and “university students,” suggesting a future diversification in research methodologies within the country. Conclusion: Currently, the global research interest in the COM-B model continues to rise, while China's research in this field started relatively late and still has a broad research space.