ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024
A bibliometric analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasound over the past twenty years.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2024. 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.
- The benefits of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and why we don't use more contrast-enhanced ultrasound in clinical practice in the United Kingdom.The British journal of radiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) technology has been developed for decades, and its application is becoming increasingly more extensive. In this study, bibliometrics was used to characterize the development status of CEUS over the past 20 years and to identify future research hotspots. Methods: We collected data from the Web of Science and analyzed the literature related to CEUS published from 2002 to 2022. We examined 6,382 publications and analyzed the publication year, country of origin, affiliated institutions, authors, journal, categories, keywords, and research frontiers within the relevant literature. Using bibliometric analysis, we aimed to determine the general research direction and current publication trends. This allowed us to identify the most prolific and outstanding authors, institutions, countries, and keywords in CEUS research. For data collection, analysis, and visualization, we employed VOSviewer (Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands), Excel (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, USA), CiteSpace, and biblioshiny. These tools helped us gather, analyze, and visualize the data effectively. Results: The analyzed publications indicated a consistent upward trend in the number of works published between 2002 and 2022. Notably, China and Sun Yat-sen University emerged as the most prolific countries and institutions, respectively. China published 391 articles with 5,817 citations and was the leader in terms of international cooperation. Moreover, pediatrics-related keywords have surged in frequency in recent years. Conclusions: The amount of research on CEUS has increased rapidly and continues to grow, with China being at the forefront of this research field. The application of CEUS in some pediatric diseases is a recent research hotspot and perhaps warrants close attention.
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.