ReviewHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2024
The top 100 most-cited papers in incisional hernia: a bibliometric analysis from 2003 to 2023.
Review in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientific publications in the field of hernia surgery: a brief bibliometric analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
- Comprehensive bibliometric and visualized analysis of research on incisional hernia and component separation from 1996 to 2023.JPRAS open · 2025Review
- Age as a non-contraindication for surgical intervention in patients with abdominal wall incisional hernia: an exploration and analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Article
- Impact of the ventral hernia working group's publication: a bibliometric analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeIncisional hernia (IH) is one of the most common complications after abdominal surgeries and may bring great suffering to patients. This study aims to evaluate the global trends in IH research from 2003 to 2023 and visualize the frontiers using bibliometric analysis.
methodsThe literature search was conducted on the Web of Science for IH studies published from 2003 to 2023 and sorted by citation frequency. The top 100 most-cited articles were analyzed by the annual publication number, prolific countries and institutions, influential author and journal, and the number of citations through descriptive statistics and visualization.
resultsThe top paper was cited 1075 times and the median number of citations was 146. All studies were published between 2003 and 2019 and the most prolific year was 2003 with 14 articles. Jeekel J and Rosen M were regarded as the most productive authors with ten articles each and acquired 2738 and 2391 citations, respectively. The top three institutions with the most productive articles were Erasmus Mc, Carolinas Med Ctr, and Univ Utah, while the top three countries were the United States, Netherlands and Germany. The most frequent keyword was "incisional hernia" with 55 occurrences, followed by "mesh repair", "randomized controlled trial", and "polypropylene".
conclusionThe 100 most-cited papers related to IH were published predominantly by USA and European countries, with randomized controlled trial (RCT) and observational study designs, addressing topics related to risk factors, complications, mesh repair, and mesh components.
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.