SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2024
Research trends and hotspots on septic shock: a bibliometric study and visualization analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global Research Landscape of Mitochondrial Dysfunction in Sepsis: A Comprehensive Bibliometric and Visualization Analysis (2000-2025).Journal of inflammation research · 2026Article
- Global Research Trends on Endothelial Glycocalyx in Sepsis: A Bibliometric Analysis.BioMed research international · 2026Review
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: Septic shock, the most severe stage of sepsis, causes potential circulatory failure and abnormal cell metabolism which are severe enough to affect prognosis, increase mortality, and impose significant burdens on the medical system. Despite a growing number of studies exploring the pathophysiology, epidemiology, and risk factors, research trends and hotspots in septic shock remain lacking. This study aims to create a visual knowledge map, identify research hotspots, and predict prospective trends based on bibliometric analysis. Methods: We searched for publications related to septic shock in Web of Science Core Collection up to June 15, 2023. CiteSpace5.5 R2, VOS viewer and Pathfinder were used to evaluate the annual publications, countries, institutions, journals and keywords. We also analyzed the collaboration among countries, institutions and authors, and identified research hotspots and frontiers. Results: A total of 4,208 English papers were included in the analysis, and the annual publication displayed a slow upward trend. In terms of publication volume, the top three countries were the United States, France, and Germany, and the University of Pittsburgh (the United States) ranked first ( Conclusion: By using bibliometrics, this study reviewed the studies in septic shock and revealed the hotspots and cutting-edge trends, including the pathogenesis of complications, the development of new biomarkers, the timing and methods of alternative treatments, and the rehabilitation trajectory, etc., which provided a reference for subsequent studies in septic shock.
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.