ArticleFrontiers in surgery2022
A Scientometric Analysis and Visualization Discovery of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery.
Article 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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence in Stroke Rehabilitation: A 20-Year Bibliometric Analysis of Digital Health Trends and Technologies.Brain and behavior · 2026Review
- Economic Entropy and the Cobb-Douglas Function: A Scientometric Analysis.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Optimizing Recovery in Cardiac Surgery: A Narrative Review of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocols and Clinical Outcomes.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Optimizing surgical outcomes for elderly gallstone patients with a high body mass index using enhanced recovery after surgery protocol.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2023Article
- Enhanced recovery after surgery from 1990 to 2024: A bibliometric and visual analysis.Saudi journal of anaesthesiaArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS), a new clinical surgical concept, has been applied in many surgical disciplines with good clinical results for the past 20 years. Bibliometric analysis is an effective method to quantitatively evaluate the academic productivity. This report aimed to perform a scientometric analysis of the ERAS research status and research hotspots. Methods: Comprehensive scientific mapping analysis of a wide range of literature metadata using the scientometric tools, including the Bibliometrix R Package, Biblioshiny, and CiteSpace. Data were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection database of original articles from 2001 to 2020. Specific indicators and maps were analyzed to show the co-authorship, co-institute, co-country, co-citation, and international cooperation. Automatic literature screening, unsupervised cluster filtering, and topic cluster identification methods were used to display the conceptual framework and thematic evolution. Results: A total of 1,403 research projects drafted by 6,966 authors and published in 413 sources were found. There was an exponential growth in the number of publications on ERAS. There were 709 collaborations between authors from different countries, and the US, China, and the UK had the greatest number of publications. The WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, located in Bradford's Law 1, had the highest number of published articles ( Conclusion: This is the first scientometric analysis of ERAS to provide descriptive quantitative indicators. This can provide a better understanding of how the field has evolved over the past 20 years, help identify research trends, and provide insights and research directions for academic researchers, policymakers, and medical practitioners who want to collaborate in these areas in the future.
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.