ReviewHeliyon2024
Research hotspots and trends in nursing for diabetic foot ulcers: A bibliometric analysis from 2013 to 2023.
Review in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global Research Trends and Healthcare Innovations in Plantar Pressure Management for Diabetic Foot Ulcers: A 25-Year Bibliometric and Visual Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Research status and trends of diabetic foot related osteomyelitis from 1994 to 2024: A 30-year bibliometric analysis.Medicine · 2025Article
- Global Trends in Diabetic Foot Research (2004-2023): A Bibliometric Study Based on the Scopus Database.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Nursing can effectively prevent and ameliorate diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). However, there is a lack of literature on the bibliometric analysis of DFU nursing. This study aimed to analyze the research hotspots and development trends in DFU nursing over the past 10 years to provide references for future related research. Methods: The Web of Science Core Collection was used to retrieve literature related to DFU nursing from 2013 to 2023. Analyses included the annual publication trends; author, institution, and country collaborations; journal and literature co-citation; and keyword co-occurrence, clustering, and bursting, performed using CiteSpace 5.8 R3. Results: A total of 229 papers were included, showing an upward trend in annual publications. American scholar David G Armstrong (n = 3) and King's College Hospital London (n = 4) were the most productive authors and institutions, respectively. The United States ranked first (n = 45) in national contributions, followed by China and Brazil. The overall research strength between authors and institutions was relatively scattered, and intensive cooperation has not yet been formed. National collaborations resulted in a core team dominated by Europe and North America with concentrated research strengths. The most frequently co-cited journal and co-cited reference were Conclusion: The field of DFU nursing requires more attention. Academic exchange and cooperation between authors, institutions, and countries should be strengthened. Our future research will focus on the latest hotspots and trends, conducting more in-depth and comprehensive studies on DFU management.
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.