ReviewArchives of osteoporosis2025
Knowledge mapping of osteoporotic fractures: a bibliometric analysis from 2014 to 2024.
Review in Archives of osteoporosis, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOsteoporosis and subsequent fractures not only seriously threaten the health of the aging but also escalate healthcare costs and social burdens. Undoubtedly, it is necessary to constantly optimize the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporotic fractures, and further understanding and investigation of the related studies is indispensable. However, the research on osteoporotic fractures is difficult to summarize, with complicated content and multiple disciplines involved. Consequently, this bibliometric analysis was conducted to gain a comprehensive understanding and grasp the hot topic of osteoporosis worldwide, which is beneficial to precisely guide research trends and demonstrate emerging treatments and preventive strategies.
methodsThe literature published between January 2014 and October 2024 was systematically searched in the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC). Visualization software, including Vosviewer and CiteSpace, was used to conduct the analysis.
resultsA total of 6682 publications were obtained from 2014 to 2024 for bibliometric analysis. The USA is far ahead of other countries in both the number of publications and frequency of citations, with extensive co-authorship collaborations with nearly all other countries. Cyrus Cooper is the most influential author, and the University of Sheffield is the most influential organization in the related fields. The keywords are categorized as 6 clusters, including "hip fracture," "bone turnover," "denosumab," "atypical femoral fracture," "vitamin D," and "bone strength". The ongoing hotspots include "teriparatide," "hip," "fragility fractures," and "outcome".
conclusionThis study comprehensively summarizes the topic trends and developments in the field of osteoporotic fractures using bibliometric analysis over the past decade. The hotspots and frontiers mainly focused on the prediction of osteoporosis and fractures, drug treatment, and clinical management. The intersection of multiple disciplines and various emerging frontiers has provided great potential for the management of osteoporotic fractures. Further investigation and more clinical translation are necessary.
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.