SynthesisFrontiers in surgery2025
Bibliometric study of research trends in dysphagia complicating following anterior cervical spine surgery.
Synthesis in Frontiers in surgery, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study was to assess the global research status and trends in the occurrence of dysphagia after cervical spine surgery using bibliometrics. Methods: All relevant research publications on dysphagia occurring after cervical spine surgery were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection database. Literature coupling, co-citation and co-occurrence analyses were subsequently visualised using VOSviewer, CiteSpace. WPS Office was applied for data summary processing. Results: Between 2000 and 2023, a total of 477 clinical studies met the inclusion criteria. The number of global publications has steadily increased in four stages over the last 19 years, with the United States having the most publications (=194), followed by China (=134) and South Korea (=34). The most contributing institutions were UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SYSTEM in the USA ( Conclusion: This bibliometric study analyses the global research hotspots and trends in postoperative cervical spine complication dysphagia in terms of study type, patient information, surgical modality, surgical segment, most popular keywords, most cited papers, journals, authors, institutions, and countries, to guide future practice and direction, in order to help understand how to effectively prevent or reduce the incidence of this postoperative complication so as to achieve the goal of lowering the patient's healthcare costs, to balance social medical resources and reduce the financial burden of the government.
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.