ReviewCureus2026
Surgical Site Infection Prevention Research: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Top 50 Highly Cited Articles.
Review in Cureus, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surgical site infections remain a major concern in modern surgical practice, as they are among the most frequent postoperative complications and place a substantial burden on patients and healthcare systems worldwide. Through a bibliometric analysis, this study examined the 50 most highly cited publications addressing surgical site infection prevention, aiming to describe research trends, dominant study designs, involved specialties, and the overall strength of the available evidence. A comprehensive search of the Web of Science Core Collection was performed in March 2025 using predefined terms related to surgical site infection and preventive strategies. Following the screening of 2,728 records, the top 50 most cited articles were selected for analysis. Bibliographic characteristics and study-level variables, including study design, level of evidence, specialty, and reported outcomes, were independently extracted by two reviewers, and descriptive analyses were conducted. The included publications demonstrated a predominance of retrospective cohort studies, with most articles classified as level two evidence. General surgery and orthopedic surgery were the most frequently represented specialties. Research output peaked during the 2010s, a period that included a higher proportion of controlled trials but also underscored the ongoing challenges of conducting large-scale interventional studies. Overall, this analysis highlights substantial scholarly interest in surgical site infection prevention while revealing a continued shortage of randomized studies despite a sustained global attention to this topic.
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.