ArticleDiscover oncology2025
FLASH radiotherapy at a crossroads: a bibliometric perspective on progress and challenges.
Article in Discover oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Bibliometric analysis of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for oligometastases.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFlash radiotherapy (FLASH-RT), an emerging modality utilizing ultra-high dose-rate (UHDR) irradiation (typically > 40 Gy/s), has demonstrated a unique capacity to preserve normal tissue integrity while maintaining tumor control efficacy compared to conventional radiotherapy. Despite exponential growth in FLASH-RT research over the past decade, its scientific landscape has not yet been systematically characterized through bibliometric analysis. This study only includes articles from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) and is limited to English-language publications, which may introduce database and language biases.
methodsRelevant articles and reviews on FLASH-RT were retrieved from the WoSCC database. Bibliometric analysis and scientific knowledge mapping were performed using the R packages Bibliometrix, CiteSpace, and VOSviewer, in conjunction with the online analytical tools provided by Web of Science (WoS).
resultsA total of 572 publications from 2013 to 2025, spanning 179 countries/regions and involving 2,049 institutions, were analyzed. The United States, Switzerland, and China were the leading contributors. The University of Lausanne had the highest research output. These publications appeared in 96 different journals, with Medical Physics contributing the most studies. Among 2995 authors, Vozenin MC had the highest publication count and H-index, while Favaudon V's papers received the most citations. Frequent keywords included irradiation, flash radiotherapy, radiation therapy, and cells. Keyword clustering revealed eleven major research directions, primarily focusing on pencil beam scanning and dosimetry.
conclusionThis first bibliometric analysis of FLASH-RT research highlights key trends, influential contributors, and challenges. These findings provide valuable insights into research frontiers and hotspots, guiding future studies and collaborations.
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.