ReviewAnnals of thoracic medicine
Bibliometric analysis of research hotspots in tracheal intubation for children.
Review in Annals of thoracic medicine. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Difficult airway management remains a major challenge for paediatric anaesthesiologists. Our aim is to visualise the research hotspots of tracheal intubation for children using bibliometric analysis and clarify the development status of this research field. English articles on pediatric intubation (2009-2025, Web of Science) were analyzed. Only original and review studies included. Publication trends, countries, authors, journals, keywords, and citations were statistically analyzed and visualized. The study results showed that a total of 752 eligible articles were included, and the annual number of publications showed a fluctuating increase, reaching a peak of 64 in 2023. The United States ranked first in both the number of publications (265) and citations (5,935). The journal Pediatric Anesthesia had the largest number of publications (58) and also the highest local citations (13,878). The most cited author globally was Silbergleit (468 citations), and the author with the most publications was Nishisaki (27 articles). The institution with the most publications was the University of Pennsylvania. The top three high-frequency keywords were children (329 times, 17%), endotracheal intubation (183 times, 9%) and tracheal intubation (125 times, 6%), and the core research hotspots were intubation efficacy, safety and airway difficulties. Study analyzes 752 pediatric intubation articles (2009-2025), showing growing interest, peak in 2023. U.S. leads; China productive but less recognized. Focus on anesthesia, critical care; Nishisaki prominent. Shift from basic to personalized techniques, emphasizing safety, difficult airways. Lacks Global South input. Highlights trends, guides clinical priorities, informs research.
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.