ReviewLasers in medical science2025
The 28-year evolution of laser acupuncture: a CiteSpace knowledge graph visualization and analysis.
Review in Lasers in medical science, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLaser acupuncture (LA) is an emerging therapeutic modality that employs non-invasive laser irradiation to induce biological effects and enhance physiological functions. Its application in clinical settings has become widespread, with extensive research supporting its efficacy in rehabilitation and various medical treatments.
objectiveThis study utilized CiteSpace to perform a visual analysis of 957 LA-related publications (1996-2024), aiming to identify evolving research trends, track the progression of LA in medical fields, and offer insights for future investigations.
methodsLiterature on LA from the Web of Science (WOS) Core Collection (1996-2024) was analyzed using CiteSpace. Visualization maps were generated for keywords, authors, institutions, and journals. Co-occurrence, clustering, and burst detection analyses were conducted on author networks, national collaborations, and keyword trends. RESULTS AND
conclusionA total of 957 studies were analyzed. Key findings include: (1) LA demonstrates significant interdisciplinary potential, meriting further exploration. (2) Future research should extend beyond efficacy assessments and systematic reviews to explore innovative perspectives and broaden research directions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41385121What 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.