SynthesisFrontiers in surgery2022
Bibliometric Analysis of Mexican Publications on Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery From 1949 to 2021.
Synthesis in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Early Implications for Solid Organ Transplantation With the Use of Artificial Intelligence From a Bibliometric Perspective.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2026Review
- Bibliometric Analysis: Six Decades of Scientific Production from a Nationwide Institution: Instituto de Seguridad y Servicios Sociales de los Trabajadores del Estado (ISSSTE) from Mexico.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Stereotactic and functional neurosurgery (SFN) is a rapidly evolving field and some emerging countries, especially Mexico, have made significant contributions to this discipline. A bibliometric analysis has never been performed in Latin America, and this would be particularly important to show the areas that remain poorly studied, and design research strategies for the future. Methods: Scopus was queried using keywords pertaining to functional neurosurgery, restricting the affiliation country to Mexico, and considering documents published after 1949. Added to the initial search, a complementary literature exploration by author, considering the publications of the most productive neurosurgeons, was performed. A descriptive statistical analysis was carried out. Results: From 5,109 articles, only 371 were eligible. Scientific production has gradually increased with time. Epilepsy (31%) and movement disorders (27.4%) were the most studied neurological conditions, whereas the other 41.6% corresponded to pain, behavior disorders, spinal cord injuries, neuromodulation, stereotactic biopsies, and SFN history. Level of evidence was predominantly level V (59.1%). Publication output is highly skewed to Mexico City, which represents 78.4% of national production. Relative to factors associated with impact of research, publications in English had more citations (28.5 mean citations per paper), and journals with an impact factor greater than one had more than 10 mean citations per paper. Conclusions: Mexico has experienced an increase in the productivity of SFN literature, addressing the most prevalent issues in the country (epilepsy and motor disorders). However, it is necessary to report studies with a higher level of evidence, as well as to decentralize the research collaborating with national institutions outside Mexico City. On the other hand, it is imperative to promote scientific production in English and in high-impact indexed journals to increase the visibility of our production. We would like to call upon our colleagues in other countries to reproduce our methodology, in order to determine the factors associated with the impact and productivity on SFN research.
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.