ArticleBrain and behavior2025
The Evolution of Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury Research in Ischemic Stroke: Insights From a Two-Decade Bibliometric Analysis.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular Dissection of Permanent vs. Reperfused Ischemia: Multi-Omics Divergence and Precision Therapeutic Implications.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Article
- Advances in the mechanisms of electroacupuncture in the treatment of cerebral ischemia-reperfusion injury.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- The Role of Gap Junctions in MSC-EA.hy926 (An Endothelial Cell Model) Crosstalk Under Hypoxic Stress: Regulation of the Angiogenic Response.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- The effect of cinnamon bark oil in bilateral common carotid artery occlusion-induced cerebral ıischemia model in rats.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Trim7 aggravates ischemic stroke-associated ferroptosis by promoting ubiquitin-mediated degradation of HSPA5.Cell & bioscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIschemic stroke is a complex disease with high mortality and disability rates. Ischemia-reperfusion injury is a common aftermath. There have been significant advancements in understanding ischemia-reperfusion injury in ischemic stroke over the past two decades. This study aims to evaluate the current state of ischemia-reperfusion injury in ischemic stroke through bibliometric analysis, identifying key research areas and emerging trends.
methodsRelevant documents in the Web of Science Core Collection, SCI-Expanded from January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2023, were downloaded on July 10, 2024. Bibliometric analysis was performed using HistCite, VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and Bibliometrics online analysis platform.
resultsA total of 2179 research papers from 611 journals in 66 countries were included in this study. Among these papers, China emerged as the leading contributor of ischemia-reperfusion injury in ischemic stroke publications, with Capital Medical University standing out as the institution with the highest number of publications in this area. Y. Zhang was identified as the author with the most publications during the study period. Brain Research was found to be the most prolific journal for this research. The keywords "ferroptosis", "circular RNA", "polarization", and "fatty acid binding protein" represent the current hot spots of ischemia-reperfusion injury in ischemic stroke research.
conclusionThis bibliometric analysis offers the first thorough overview of hot spots and research trends in ischemia-reperfusion injury in ischemic stroke over the previous 21 years, providing researchers with new ideas in the field. "ferroptosis", "circular RNA", "polarization", and "fatty acid binding protein" may be the focus of future studies.
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.