ReviewAnnals of translational medicine2021
Scientific landscape and trend analysis of keloid research: a 30-year bibliometric review.
Review in Annals of translational medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analyzing the Landscape of Botulinum Toxin Research: A Bibliometric Study of Publication Performance and Emerging Trends.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2025Review
- A bibliometric analysis of Cushing's disease and magnetic resonance imaging: history, research hotspots, and emerging trends.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Comments on 'Global research trends in tongue cancer from 2000 to 2022: bibliometric and visualized analysis', by Wu et al.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Scientific Production Dynamics in mHealth for Diabetes: Scientometric Analysis.JMIR diabetes · 2024Article
- Post-operative KEloids iRradiation (POKER): does the surgery/high-dose interventional radiotherapy association make a winning hand?La Radiologia medica · 2024Article
- Global research status of localised scleroderma reported over the period 1993-2022: A 30-year bibliometric analysis.International wound journal · 2024Review
- Bibliometric research on the developments of artificial intelligence in radiomics toward nervous system diseases.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- Scientific Knowledge Graph and Trend Analysis of Central Sensitization: A Bibliometric Analysis.Journal of pain research · 2022Article
- Treatment of Keloids Using Plasma Skin Regeneration Combined with Radiation Therapy Under the Evaluation of Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2021Article
- Trends of High-Impact Studies in Pharmacology and Pharmacy: A Cross-Sectional Study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundKeloids remain troublesome for clinicians because of the lack of standard therapy, and the underlying mechanisms are still unclear. Bibliometric analysis could be a powerful tool to comprehensively review research trends, evaluate publication performances and provide future perspectives. There is no bibliometric analysis focusing on keloid research.
methodsKeloid related publications were searched in Web of Science Core Collection from the publication year 1990 to 2019. Bibliometric data were provided on document type, annual publication number, most productive journals, publication geography, top potential authors, and highly cited articles. The distribution of single words in article titles was analyzed to evaluate the main research focuses and determine their development trends. Word cluster analysis was further performed to detect emerging trends in keloid research.
resultsThe number of annual articles increased from 24 in 1990 to 63 in 2006 and then increased sharply, reaching 139 in 2019. DISCUSSION: Keloids remain a research focus. Efforts will be continuously made to understand the underlying mechanism of keloid formation. Despite many treatment modalities, there is no gold standard for keloid treatment, and many efforts are being made in the exploration of new therapies. Moreover, it is foreseeable that objective measurement tools will have a higher status in the assessment of keloids and scars.
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.