SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2024
Tracing the evolving dynamics and research hotspots of spinal cord injury and surgical decompression from 1975 to 2024: a bibliometric analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Impact of ultra-early, early and delayed decompression on neurological and clinical outcomes in spinal cord injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2025Pooled it
- A visualization analysis of research on arterial compression hemostatic devices using VOSviewer and CiteSpace.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Pooled it
- CRISPR and Artificial Intelligence in Neuroregeneration: Closed-Loop Strategies for Precision Medicine, Spinal Cord Repair, and Adaptive Neuro-Oncology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Exploration of the benefits and timing of surgical decompression in spinal cord injury (SCI) has been a research hotspot. However, despite the higher volume and increasing emphasis on quality there remains no bibliometric view on SCI and surgical decompression. In this study, we aimed to perform bibliometric analysis to reveal the core countries, affiliations, journals, authors, and developmental trends in SCI and surgical decompression across the past 50 years. Methods: Articles and reviews were retrieved from web of science core collection between 1975 and 2024. The bibliometrix package in R was used for data analysis and visualizing. Results: A total of 8,688 documents were investigated, indicating an ascending trend in annual publications. The USA and China played as the leaders in scientific productivity. The University of Toronto led in institutional productions. Core authors, such as Michael G. Fehlings, showed high productivity, and occasional authors showed widespread interests. Core journals like Conclusion: Based on comprehensive bibliometric analysis and literature review, we identified the hotspots and future directions of this field: (1) further investigation into the molecular and cellular mechanisms to provide pre-clinical evidence for biological effects of early surgical decompression in SCI animal models; (2) further evaluation and validation of the optimal time window of surgical decompression based on large cohort, considering the inherent heterogeneity of subpopulations in complicated immune responses post SCI; (3) further exploration on the benefits of early decompression on the neurological, functional, and clinical outcomes in acute SCI; (4) evaluation of the optimal surgical methods and related outcomes; (5) applications of artificial intelligence-based technologies in spinal surgical decompression.
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.