ArticleDiscover oncology2025
A global bibliometric map of Mendelian randomization in lung cancer research: trends, themes, and emerging risks.
Article in Discover oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advancing the understanding of alveolar regeneration: Global research trends, thematic evolution, and emerging frontiers.Regenerative therapy · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough Mendelian randomization (MR) studies on lung cancer (LC) have grown significantly, a comprehensive bibliometric analysis remains lacking. This study addresses that gap by examining global research trends, leading contributors, and emerging themes in MR related to LC.
methodsWe conducted a bibliometric analysis of publications from 2005 to 2024, using data from the Web of Science Core Collection. Research trends, collaboration networks, and key themes were visualized with VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and the R package 'bibliometrix'.
resultsThe analysis included 332 publications by 2,797 researchers across 50 countries. A notable increase in studies occurred after 2017, with China, the United States, and England as the top contributors. Key institutions included the University of Bristol and Nanjing Medical University. The most productive journals were Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention and International Journal of Epidemiology, while Nature Genetics was the most cited. The research identified multiple causal pathways for LC linked to inflammation, genetics, lifestyle factors, lung diseases, and psychiatric conditions. Emerging themes include the roles of gut microbiota, schizophrenia, C-reactive protein, and asthma in LC development.
conclusionThis bibliometric analysis of MR studies on LC highlights global research trends and emerging areas, particularly the roles of gut microbiota, schizophrenia, and inflammation in LC risk. These insights lay a strong foundation for advancing personalized prevention and treatment in future MR 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.