ArticleFrontiers in medicine2022
A Bibliometric Analysis of Publications on Endoscopic Ultrasound.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Studies on endoscopic submucosal dissection in the past 15 years: A bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2022Pooled it
- Bibliometric analysis of global research trends on ultrasound in inflammatory bowel disease: A quickly developing field.Medicine · 2025Article
- One hundred most cited articles related to Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Research hotspots and trends in visceral pain research: A global comprehensive bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2022Article
- Mapping knowledge landscapes and emerging trends of sonodynamic therapy: A bibliometric and visualized study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Gastrointestinal endoscopy and visceral surgery: current status and potentials for interdisciplinary patient care.Therapeutic advances in gastrointestinal endoscopyReview
- The evolution of diagnostic EUS: Milestones, technologies, and global contributions.Endoscopic ultrasoundReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Over the past 40 years, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has become a safe and effective tool for both diagnostic and therapeutic applications. A growing number of articles have been published annually. We aimed to explore global scientific outputs and hotspots of EUS published by different countries, organizations, and authors. Methods: The global literature regarding EUS during the 1900-2020 period was identified from the Web of Science (WOS) Core database. "Bibliometrix" and software VOSviewer were applied to perform bibliometric analysis. Results: The annual growth rate of publications from 1980 to 2020 was around 16% and the number of EUS-related articles had experienced a sudden increase in the last decade. Bhutani MS was the most productive author over the past years, with 94 publications. Hawes RH had the highest number of citations, with 6,034 citations. The United States and institutions from United States dominated the EUS research. Among the journals, GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY published the highest number of articles, followed by ENDOSCOPY. The majority of top 10 frequently cited references were cited more than 200 times. Carcinoma, diagnosis, fine-needle-aspiration, cytology, and pancreatitis were the important keywords in co-occurrence analysis of keywords. Recent studies focused more on tissue acquisition, size of the needle, lumen-apposing metal stent, and fine-needle- biopsy. Conclusion: Research on EUS has significantly increased in the last decade globally and it will continue to increase. Active collaboration among different authors and countries was observed in the EUS field. Tissue acquisition, size of the needle, apposing metal stent, and fine-needle-biopsy might be the latest research frontiers and should receive more attention.
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.