SynthesisFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022
A bibliometric analysis on the progress of myocardial bridge from 1980 to 2022.
Synthesis in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Although the vast majority of patients with a myocardial bridge (MB) are asymptomatic, the anomaly was found to be associated with stable or unstable angina, vasospastic angina, acute coronary syndrome, and even malignant arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death in some cases. Methods: By retrieving the relevant literature on MB from 1 January 1980 to 31 July 2022 from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database, we used the bibliometric tools, including CiteSpace, VOS viewer, and alluvial generator, to visualize the scientific achievements on MB. Results: A total of 630 articles were included. The number of published articles was in a fluctuating growth trend. These publications came from 37 contries, led by the USA and China. The leading country on MB was the United States, the leading position among institutions was Stanford University, and the most productive researcher on MB was Jennifer A. Tremmel. After analysis, the most common keywords were myocardial bridge, mortality, coronary angiography, descending coronary artery, and sudden death. Conclusion: Our findings can aid researchers in understanding the current state of MB research and in choosing fresh lines of inquiry for forthcoming investigations. Prevalence and prognosis, mechanism atherosclerosis, hemodynamic significance, and molecular autops will likely become the focus of future research. In addition, more studies and cooperations are still needed worldwide.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.