ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2025
Electrophysiology in neuropathic pain: a bibliometric analysis and literature review.
Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 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.
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
Objective: Neuropathic pain (NP), a prevalent chronic condition with increasing global incidence, mainly relies on electrophysiology (EP) to decode its mechanisms. However, existing research lacks systematic integration, failing to track hotspots and frontiers effectively. In this study, we used bibliometric analysis and systematic review to clarify technological breakthrough directions and facilitate the development of electrophysiological phenotype-based precision diagnostics. Methods: Literature was retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC). A total of 2,234 reviews and articles were obtained from 2005 to 2024. Statistics and visualization analysis were performed using Bibliometrix (R), VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and Microsoft Excel 2024. Results: Publications and citations in this field are rising. The USA leads in publications (613, 27.44%) and academic impact (H-index = 96). China's academic impact remains behind when compared to other countries. North American and Western European institutions form robust collaboration networks, whereas Asian institutions exhibit weaker regional partnerships. Authors with high production, such as Khanna, Rajesh and Waxman, Stephen G, and highly cited authors such as Woolf, CJ play a key leading role in the development of the field. Journals like Pain and Journal of Neuroscience are the cardinal dissemination mediums. Keyword analysis reveals research hotspot expands from the basic structure of "dorsal root ganglion" and" sensory neuron" to pain-related dynamic changes and disease prevalence characteristics. "Plasticity" and "connectivity" signaled a shift in research toward network mechanisms and precise interventions. "Woolf CJ, 2011" and "Dib-Hajj SD, 2010" have high citation and co-citation frequencies. The emergence of new directions such as "dynamic pain connectome" and "computational modeling research" reflects the trend of multidisciplinary integration. Conclusion: For the first time, we have constructed a complete lineage from basic research to clinical translation in this field, confirming the key role of EP technology in analyzing the mechanism of nociceptive sensitization, neuroplasticity, and neural network connectivity reconfiguration, which provides a basis for developing precise diagnostic and therapeutic solutions based on electrophysiological phenotypes. Future research should focus on technology standardization, cross-institutional data sharing, clinical translation, and connectomics-oriented individualized analgesic strategies to promote NP diagnosis and treatment toward precision, dynamics, and systematization.
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.