ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2025
The Development of Publications on Catheter-Related Bladder Discomfort: A Bibliometric Analysis.
Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Catheter-related bladder discomfort (CRBD) is a risk factor that impacts postoperative recovery and still troubles patients and healthcare staff. The present study is a bibliometric analysis of CRBD. Methods: The publications on CRBD were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. VOSviewer and Excel were applied to present the current status and hot spots of CRBD research. We analyzed parameters such as the annual number of publications, countries/regions, organizations, authors, journals, and keywords of the articles in this area by generating visualization graphs. Results: A total of 127 articles were eligible, recorded by 78 journals, and drafted by 672 authors from 169 organizations in 26 countries/regions. The main type of these articles is randomized trial. Park Hee-Pyoung, Kim Hyun-Chang, and Cui Yuanshan are the most productive authors with 5 articles. Sichuan University, Seoul National University, Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Capital Medical University, and Qingdao University published more articles on CRBD worldwide. China ranks No. 1 in terms of the number of publications, followed by South Korea and India. Journals specialized in anesthesiology, such as BMC Anesthesiology, Journal of Anesthesia, and British Journal of Anesthesia, are more popular with researchers in this area. The research hot spots of CRBD have concentrated on the prevention and treatment of CRBD. Conclusion: Though formal research on CRBD started late, there is a rising tendency for the number of publications. Authors and academic teams from Asia have made significant contribution to CRBD. Journals specialized in anesthesiology are priorities for publishing articles. Previous studies mainly focused on the pharmacological and pharmacological methods to CRBD. However, CRBD is not fully settled. Either clinical or experimental studies are still needed to further improve CRBD.
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.