ReviewCureus2022
Bibliometric Analysis on Bibliometric Studies of Case Reports in the Medical Field.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Widespread venous thrombosis: Unveiling a complex case of Behçet's disease with a literature perspective.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2025Article
- Review
- Emerging Themes and Research Frontiers in Suicide Prediction: A Scientometric Analysis.Cureus · 2024Review
- Review
- The Intellectual Landscape of Nanovaccines: A Bibliometric Perspective on Scientific Progress and Future Directions.Cureus · 2024Review
- Evolution of Scientific Production on Phlebitis Secondary to Vascular Access: A 71-Year Bibliometric Analysis.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The studies on bibliometric analyses of case reports usually give valuable information regarding various aspects of case reports but lack investigation analysing these publications. This is the first-ever study to examine the bibliometric articles on case reports; hence, it is hypothesized to provide a valuable contribution to this gap. PubMed and SCOPUS databases were searched, and a total of 119 articles were obtained, but only five were analyzed matching the inclusion criteria. The keywords involved in the search were "Bibliometrics", "analysis", "case reports", "case series", and "articles" whereas, the time range in which the case reports were searched for was between 2011-2021. Common parameters from these five articles were employed for bibliometric analysis, which included publication year, publication type, the number of case reports per article, theme or subject of the article, citation, and impact factor (IF). Out of the five articles identified, four were published in 2021. One out of five was a case report, and the rest were review-type of articles. The overall citation number of these articles was less than 10, and the IF of these articles was between 0-0.007. The number of citations of the articles was in a period of one to two years or less than one year. A comprehensive overview of the parametrises, as well as the recent trends that are being used to conduct bibliometric analysis on case reports was acquired.
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.