ReviewFrontiers in neurology2024
A bibliometric analysis and visualization of normal pressure hydrocephalus.
Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Bibliometric and visualization analysis of hydrogel research in spinal cord injury: comparative study of Chinese and English literature.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Pooled it
- Hydrogel research in peripheral nerve injury repair: a comprehensive multi-database bibliometric analysis (2015-2025).Frontiers in neurologyPooled it
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
Background: Normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) has drawn an increasing amount of attention over the last 20 years. At present, there is a shortage of intuitive analysis on the trends in development, key contributors, and research hotspots topics in the NPH field. This study aims to analyze the evolution of NPH research, evaluate publications both qualitatively and quantitatively, and summarize the current research hotspots. Methods: A bibliometric analysis was conducted on data retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database between 2003 and 2023. Quantitative assessments were conducted using bibliometric analysis tools such as VOSviewer and CiteSpace software. Results: A total of 2,248 articles published between 2003 and 2023 were retrieved. During this period, the number of publications steadily increased. The United States was the largest contributor. The University of Gothenburg led among institutions conducting relevant research. Eide P. K. was the most prolific author. The Journal of Neurosurgery is the leading journal on NPH. According to the analysis of the co-occurrence of keywords and co-cited references, the primary research directions identified were pathophysiology, precise diagnosis, and individualized treatment. Recent research hotspots have mainly focused on epidemiology, the glymphatic system, and CSF biomarkers. Conclusion: The comprehensive bibliometric analysis of NPH offers insights into the main research directions, highlights key countries, contributors, and journals, and identifies significant research hotspots. This information serves as a valuable reference for scholars to further study NPH.
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.