ReviewCureus2024
Bibliometric Insights Into Thromboelastography Research Using PubMed and VOSviewer.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Thromboelastography (TEG) has evolved from a primarily surgical tool to a key instrument in broader medical fields, including personalized medicine for coagulopathies. The rationale for conducting this bibliometric analysis of TEG is to understand the evolution and current state of research in this critical field. By identifying publication trends, key contributors, and major developments, this study aims to provide valuable insights to guide future research and clinical practices in TEG. This bibliometric study, utilizing the PubMed database, delineates the research landscape of TEG by analyzing publication patterns, the frequency of keywords, and author collaborations to understand the growth and direction of the discipline. Bibliographic data were extracted from PubMed, encompassing publications up to the year 2024. Using VOSviewer software, network maps were generated to visualize relationships among authors, institutions, and thematic keywords. Rigorous selection criteria were applied, focusing on peer-reviewed articles relevant to TEG's medical and surgical applications, while excluding non-English papers, non-peer-reviewed materials, and non-clinical research. The analysis identified a significant increase in TEG-related publications in recent years: 461 in 2021, 427 in 2022, and 315 in 2023, with 6 publications early in 2024. Key figures such as Moore (111 publications), Nielsen (77 publications), and Moore (71 publications) emerged as prolific contributors. The research also highlighted a heightened focus on demographic-specific characteristics in TEG studies, reflecting the shift toward personalized medicine. This bibliometric analysis provides a comprehensive overview of TEG research, signifying its growing clinical relevance and potential for future applications. Despite limitations, such as potential database selection bias, the study outlines a clear expansion of TEG into various clinical environments and underscores the importance of inter-author collaboration. It suggests that TEG research is progressing towards interdisciplinary applications, including genetic profiling and machine learning, to further enhance patient-specific treatment modalities.
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.