ReviewEndocrine, metabolic & immune disorders drug targets2025
Global Publication Trends and Research Hotspots of Diabetes and Osteoporosis.
Review in Endocrine, metabolic & immune disorders drug targets, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDiabetes and osteoporosis, as chronic diseases with high incidence, have caused deep concern in the field of global public health due to their high morbidity and mortality. More importantly, the complex and close relationship between diabetes and osteoporosis has gradually become the focus of scientific research. It is very meaningful to carry out bibliometric analysis in the research field of diabetes and osteoporosis to describe the current international trend and present a visual representation of the past and emerging trends of diabetes and osteoporosis in the past decade.
methodsIn this study, the characteristics of the articles on "diabetes and osteoporosis" retrieved and downloaded from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database from January 1, 2011 to December 1, 2022 were analyzed by bibliometrics to clarify the evolution and theme trends between the two diseases. Citespace software was used for data analysis and visualization, including countries, academic institutions, journals, authors, subject categories, keywords, references, and citations. In addition, some important subtopics identified by bibliometric characterization were further discussed and reviewed.
resultsFinally, 3372 articles were included in the analysis, including a total of 96 countries, 407 organizations, 1161 journals, and 617 keywords. Articles related to diabetes and osteoporosis were first published in 2011 and then showed an increasing trend year by year. The United States, China, Italy, England, and Japan were the top 5 countries associated with the largest number of publications. University of California-San Francisco, China Medical University, University of Toronto, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, and Mayo Clinic were the top 5 academic institutions in terms of the number of published papers. The top 5 authors with the highest number of publications were William D, Ann V, Nicola, Peter, and Toshitsugu. Osteoporosis International has published 130 articles in this field, ranking first among highly productive journals. In addition to diabetes and osteoporosis, the most frequently used keywords were bone mineral density, obesity, and fracture.
conclusionMore and more studies have been conducted on diabetes and osteoporosis, and the current research mainly focuses on the pathogenesis of various chronic diseases. In the future, more attention may be paid to the prevention and management of these two chronic diseases and the production and application of new drugs.
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.