ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2022
Emerging trends and frontier research on recurrent implantation failure: a bibliometric analysis.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Meta-analysis of endometrial transcriptome data reveals novel molecular targets for recurrent implantation failure.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Pooled it
- Knowledge structure and dynamic evolution of nanomedicine in liver cancer research: a scientometric analysis and visualization.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Variability and implications of recurrent implantation failure definitions used in the scientific literature: a systematic review.Human reproduction open · 2025Article
- Bibliometric Analysis of Brain Stimulation Technologies in Sleep Disorders.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024Article
- Article
- Trends in research related to menopausal hormone therapy from 2000 to 2021: A bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) has been recognized to be a major obstacle to the successful application of artificial reproduction technologies. In this study, the trends in RIF research were examined through a bibliometric analysis evaluating relevant literature quantitatively and qualitatively. Methods: A total of 1,764 publications from 2000 to 2020 were downloaded from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC). Relevant articles were searched using the term "recurrent implantation failure" and other synonyms of this term. Using Excel 2013, CiteSpace V, and VOSviewer 1.6.10 software, data extracted from the literature, including countries/regions, institutions, journals, keywords, and trends, were analyzed. Next, a clustered network was constructed based on 46,718 references cited by the 1,764 publications to determine the top 10 cocited articles. Results: The annual number of publications on RIF progressively increased over time. The highest number of publications were from the United States. Analysis of the cocited reference cluster showed that "endometrial injury", "platelet-rich plasma", "chronic endometritis" and "extracellular vesicles" were the hotspots in RIF research. Burst detection analysis of the top keywords showed that "hysteroscopy" and "improvement" are emerging research foci. Conclusions: This study clarifies the current research status and evolution of research in the field of RIF. New therapeutic interventions designed to improve pregnancy outcomes are the focus of current research and are expected to dominate future research in the field of RIF.
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.