ArticleMedicine2025
Historical trends and future key insights in osteology research: A global scientometrics and visual analysis.
Article in Medicine, 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
backgroundOsteology plays a central role in anatomical, biological, and clinical sciences. However, a comprehensive understanding of its global research landscape, historical development, and emerging trends has been lacking. This study aimed to fill that gap by conducting a scientometrics and visual analysis of bone tissue research over the past 190 years.
methodsA bibliometric study was conducted using Scopus, Web of Science All Collection, and PubMed. Publications were included if they focused on the structure or function of bones and were peer-reviewed articles. Variables included publication volume, journal quartile, citation metrics (h-index, g-index, m-index), collaboration networks, and keyword trends. Countries were classified by income level and geographic region.
resultsA total of 8103 publications were included. The field showed modest growth until 1967, followed by a marked increase peaking in 2021. Most articles were original research (91%) and published in Q1 journals (63.9%). Europe and the Americas accounted for over 80% of publications, while low- and lower-middle-income countries contributed <4%. High-income countries dominated Q1 output and collaboration networks. The most common keywords included phylogeny, osteoporosis, and dinosaur. Technological and molecular approaches have become more prominent since the 2000s.
conclusionsThis is the first global scientometrics analysis of osteology research. It reveals historical trends, regional inequalities, and thematic evolution, offering valuable insights for researchers, institutions, and policymakers to foster more inclusive and strategically guided research in osteology.
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.