ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2021
A Bibliometric Analysis of Published Literature in Postoperative Pain in Elderly Patients in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Top 100 Most-Cited Papers in Neuropathic Pain From 2000 to 2020: A Bibliometric Study.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Pooled it
- Recent advances in the treatment of pain in endometriosis: A bibliometric analysis of experimental models.Veterinary world · 2023Article
- Bibliometric Review on New Possibilities of Antimycobacterial Agents: Exploring Siderophore Desferrioxamine's Applications as an Antimicrobial Agent.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Thirty-year survey of bibliometrics used in the research literature of pain: Analysis, evolution, and pitfalls.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Global trends and current status of distraction osteogenesis: Bibliometric analysis of publications from 1980 to 2021.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Postoperative pain (POP) remains a major challenge for surgeons and anesthesiologists worldwide, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Elderly patients are at higher risk for undertreatment of pain. Despite that, there is a paucity of papers addressing POP among this population in developing countries. This study aimed to provide a bibliometric analysis of the literature concerning postoperative pain in elderly patients from low- and middle-income countries. It was performed an extensive search of papers on this subject through the Web of Science and Scopus database using a series of uniterms and, including publications from 2001 to 2021. Publication quality was assessed by using total citation frequency, average citations per item and other citation indexes. Citation indexes were low, with the highest reaching 15 citations. In conclusion, few studies of postoperative pain in the elderly in countries with medium and low income, indicating a need that has not yet been met for this population and in these areas of the world. The published studies were not specifically aimed at the elderly, had limited impact, low international visibility. They were not epidemiological studies and are not robust, weakening knowledge and decision-making towards policies directed at this vulnerable population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.