ReviewJournal of inflammation research2026
Bibliometric and Visual Analysis of Trained Immunity from 2005 to 2024.
Review in Journal of inflammation research, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Trained immunity refers to the long-term functional adaptation of innate immune responses following an initial stimulus, representing a conceptual expansion of immune memory beyond adaptive immunity. Given the rapid expansion of this field, this study aimed to systematically map the research landscape of trained immunity and to identify major research hotspots and emerging frontiers using bibliometric approaches. Methods: Publications related to trained immunity published between 2005 and 2024 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC). Bibliometric and visualization analyses were performed using CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and Bibliometrix to evaluate publication trends, collaboration patterns, and thematic evolution. Results: A total of 1,526 publications were included. Bibliometric indicators demonstrate a marked acceleration in research output following the formal conceptualization of trained immunity. The United States, the Netherlands, and Germany emerged as leading contributors, with Radboud University Nijmegen and the University of Bonn identified as central institutional hubs. Thematic and keyword-based analyses revealed that research hotspots have evolved along three interconnected dimensions: an expansion of cellular targets from classical myeloid cells to hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells and selected non-immune cells; sustained focus on epigenetic and metabolic reprogramming as core mechanistic axes; and a growing body of literature linking trained immunity to infectious diseases, chronic inflammation, and cancer-related applications. Conclusion: By integrating multiple bibliometric indicators, this study delineates the developmental trajectory and thematic structure of trained immunity research. The findings provide an updated overview of the field and highlight evolving research priorities, offering a reference framework for future investigations into innate immune memory and its translational potential.
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.