ArticleJournal of dental sciences2025
A scientometric study on research trends and characteristics of discoid lupus erythematosus.
Article in Journal of dental sciences, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/purpose: Discoid lupus erythematosus (DLE) serves as an interdisciplinary disease involved in dermatology and stomatology in many cases. The purpose of this study was to analyze the scientometric characteristics and research trends of DLE. Materials and methods: All the papers on DLE were comprehensively retrieved from the Scopus database. Discipline comparison (dermatology versus others) and chronological comparison (before 2005 versus 2005-2024) were performed, so that the number of papers can be to some extent compared in the analysis. Results: Among all the 1239 papers on DLE, 738 (59.6 %) were published by dermatologists. Diagnosis aspect, skin manifestation, facial dermatoses, scar formation, hair loss, epiluminescence microscopy, dermoepidermal junction, arthralgia, anamnesis, young adult, Ro antibody, and dermoscopy were distinctive keywords for dermatologists; While Mouth mucosa, mouth diseases, lip neoplasms, eyelid disease, blepharitis, conjunctivitis, autoantibody, blood, neutrophil, fever, sex difference, preschool child were distinctive keywords for other scholars. Treatment response, dapsone, etretin, clobetasol, mycophenolate mofetil, glucocorticoid, triamcinolone, and drug safety were therapeutic keywords for dermatologists. Whereas quinacrine, alpha tocopherol, hydrocortisone, adverse drug reaction were therapeutic keywords for other scholars. The trend has changed to complication, disease duration, young adult, dermatitis, pruritus, antibody titer, Ro antibody, anamnesis, dermoscopy, arthralgia, dermoepidermal junction, keratosis, and African American, drug withdrawal, tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, etretin, clobetasol, cyclophosphamide, and drug safety after 2005. Conclusion: This scientometric study elucidated the current scenario and research trends of DLE, and would help in improving in reciprocal collaboration and communication for investigations on this disease.
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.