ArticleClinical and experimental medicine2023
Research trends and hotspots of neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer: a bibliometric analysis based on the Web of Science Core Collection.
Article in Clinical and experimental medicine, 2023. 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.
- Research progress and trends on PET/CT imaging of pancreatic cancer: a bibliometric analysis.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- Bibliometric-driven research on chemoresistance in breast cancer: knowledge mapping, hotspot evolution, and emerging insights (1994-2024).Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Entanglement between pharmacy/pharmaceutical education and cancer? A bibliometric answer.Asian biomedicine : research, reviews and news · 2025Article
- Research trends of neoadjuvant therapy in lung cancer: a bibliometric analysis.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Knowledge mapping of childhood infectious mononucleosis: a bibliometric analysis for the twenty-first century.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2025Article
- Knowledge mapping of COVID-19 and autoimmune diseases: a visual and bibliometric analysis.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2023Article
- Visualization of the relationship between fungi and cancer from the perspective of bibliometric analysis.Heliyon · 2023Article
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
Abstract
Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for pancreatic cancer (PC) has achieved certain results. This article was aimed to analyze the trends in NAT in PC over the past 20 years using bibliometric analysis and visualization tools to guide researchers in exploring future research hotspots. Articles related to NAT for PC were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection for the period 2002-2021. The information was analyzed and visualized using VOSviewer, Citespace, Microsoft Excel and R software. The number of articles per year has continued to increase over the past 20 years. Of the 1,598 eligible articles, the highest number was from the United States (760), and an analysis of institutions indicated that the University of Texas System (150) had the highest number of articles. Matthew H. G. Katz had the highest number of citations and the highest H-index. "Pancreatic cancer" (981), "Resection" (623), "Cancer" (553), "Neoadjuvant therapy" (509) and "Survival" (484) were the top five ranked keywords. Combined with the keywords-cluster analysis and citation burst analysis, current research hotspots were the optimal NAT regimen, NAT response assessment, NAT for resectable PC and management of complications. NAT has received increasing attention in the field of PC over the past 20 years, but greater collaboration between countries and additional multicenter randomized clinical trials are needed. Overall, we have revealed current research hotspots and provided valuable information for the choice of future research directions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36773211What 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.