ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Global trends in the application of nanopore sequencing technology in the detection of infectious disease pathogens: a bibliometric analysis from 2014 to 2024.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Current status and prospects of nanopore sequencing technology in the detection of pathogenic microorganisms.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- Applications of Genome Sequencing in Infectious Diseases: From Pathogen Identification to Precision Medicine.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to comprehensively analyze the global landscape, trends, and research focus of nanopore sequencing technology in the field of pathogenic microorganism diagnosis using bibliometric analysis. Methods: Literature published between January 2014, and December 2024, was retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. A cross-sectional bibliometric analysis was conducted using VOSviewer, CiteSpace, Origin 2024, and R software to extract and evaluate metrics. Publications were categorized by country, institution, author, journal, highly cited papers, and keywords. Variables were compared based on publication output and academic impact, which included citation counts, citation impact, H-index, journal impact factor, total link strength, major pathogens, and research directions. Results: Initial searches identified 2,098 articles related to nanopore sequencing and pathogenic microorganisms, of which 729 were ultimately included in the analysis. Among the 104 participating countries, the United Kingdom, the United States, and China have led in publication output, citations, and academic influence. The most versatile institution was the University of Oxford, followed by Zhejiang University. The most productive scholars and journals were Crook, Derrick W., and Frontiers in Microbiology, respectively. Keyword analysis revealed that the primary advantages of nanopore sequencing include portability, long-read capabilities, and real-time analysis. Current research hotspots focus on real-time pathogen identification, viral genomic surveillance, and antimicrobial resistance profiling. Conclusion: Presently, nanopore sequencing is rapidly transitioning from laboratory research to on-site sequencing and public health emergency scenarios. To our knowledge, this study is the first bibliometric analysis to comprehensively delineate the latest developments in nanopore sequencing in pathogenic microorganism diagnosis. It provides researchers with an understanding of the current situation, identifies knowledge gaps, and points out future research directions.
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.