ArticleWorld journal of urology2026
Characterizing the academic literature on surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia: A bibliometric analysis.
Article in World journal of urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Global research landscape of benign prostatic hyperplasia (2010-2026): a bibliometric and visualized analysis revealing evolving trends, hotspots, and future frontiers.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Research evolution and clinical positioning of robot-assisted simple prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a bibliometric and visualization analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeHistorically managed with open surgery, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) treatment has evolved significantly with the advent of less invasive procedures aimed at improving safety and recovery. We conducted a bibliometric study using the Web of Science Core Collection to analyze global publication trends related to surgical management of BPH. Our aim was to identify leading authors, institutions, countries, influential journals, and evolving research themes to guide future investigations.
methodsA bibliometric study was performed using the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) as the primary database. Only original articles and reviews published in English were eligible for inclusion. VOSviewer (v1.6.20) was used to generate co-authorship, country collaboration, and keyword co-occurrence maps. CiteSpace (v6.3.R1) was applied for detecting citation bursts and thematic shifts, while the Bibliometrix package in R (v4.2.1) was utilized for descriptive statistics, Bradford’s Law analysis, and network visualizations. Simple linear regression was applied as a descriptive tool to indicate the overall direction of publication growth and was not intended to model non-linear innovation dynamics or provide predictive inference.
resultsBetween January 2016 and August 2025, a total of 2,613 publications on surgical management of BPH were identified. Among these, 2,161 were original articles and 452 were reviews, published across 394 different journals. The annual growth rate was calculated at 2.9%, confirming a steady increase in research output during the study period. Each paper had an average of 3.97 authors, with a mean citation rate of 10.7 per document. The dataset contained 24,415 references, while 24.0% of publications involved international collaborations.
conclusionThis analysis offers a comprehensive view of global research efforts in surgical BPH management, identifying high-yield topics, influential actors, and emerging modalities. This evolving literature base reflects a broader trend toward individualized, minimally invasive care in urology, with BPH management serving as an example.
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.