ReviewTropical animal health and production2025
A bibliometric mapping of advancements and trends in genome editing in pigs.
Review in Tropical animal health and production, 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
Abstract
Researchers have widely undertaken targeted genome editing in pigs to optimize pig productivity, disease tolerance and for biomedical research. The present study aimed to investigate research advancements, focus areas, gaps, and challenges in genome editing in pigs using bibliometric analysis. The bibliographic information of publications on genome editing in pigs from 2010 to 2023 was retrieved from the Scopus database. Bibliometric parameters, such as coauthorship, keyword co-occurrence, citation, bibliographic coupling, and cocitation, was analyzed using VOSviewer. Literature mining was conducted to evaluate the emerging areas and challenges in the development of genome-edited pigs. We found 725 documents on genome editing in pigs, 407 of which were research articles authored by 2826 researchers from 1359 research organizations across 40 countries. The two countries, China and the United States, account for more than 50% of the research publications on genome editing in pigs. Investigations on the optimization of the procedure, delivery methods, editing efficiency, and reducing off-target effects dominated the early phase of research, which has shifted to its application for generating knockout (KO) or knockin (KI) pigs in recent years. Areas such as xenotransplantation, disease resistance, higher muscling, and disease models have dominated the research horizon for genome editing in pigs. Emerging areas in gene editing include base editing, CRISPR-based screens, diagnostics, and therapeutics. However, investigations on reducing heat stress and environmental footprint through genetic alterations need more attention from scientists. Challenges such as off-target effects and regulatory, ethical and societal issues related to channelizing gene-edited pigs from lab to land and then from farm to fork continue to restrain this field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40304841What 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.