ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2025
Global Trends and Collaborative Networks in Crush Syndrome: A Bibliometric Analysis From 2000 to 2025.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Crush syndrome (CS) is a severe, potentially fatal condition resulting from prolonged muscle compression, most commonly observed following disasters such as earthquakes and large-scale traumatic events. Despite its clinical significance, there has been a lack of comprehensive bibliometric analysis exploring global research trends, collaboration networks, and emerging topics in CS research. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in the Web of Science Core Collection to identify publications on CS from 2000 to 2025. Bibliometric analysis was performed using VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and the R package "Bibliometrix" to visualize co-authorship networks, institutional collaborations, and keyword co-occurrence patterns. Only English-language articles were included. Data were analyzed for publication trends, country and institutional contributions, leading authors and journals, and evolving research themes. Results: A total of 745 publications were included, demonstrating a consistent annual increase in research output. The United States, China, and Turkey were the most productive countries. Ghent University and Istanbul University were the leading institutions. Sever MS was identified as a major contributor to the field. Conclusion: This bibliometric analysis provides a comprehensive overview of global CS research, highlighting evolving hotspots, emerging themes, and key contributors. These findings may inform future research directions and support improved clinical management of CS.
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.