ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Worldwide research tendencies on natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: a bibliometric analysis.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery, abbreviated as NOTES, a novel surgical technique, involves the insertion of a flexible endoscope into a natural orifice, such as the oral cavity, stomach, vagina, colon, or bladder, to access a specific site for endoscopically assisted surgical procedures. In recent years, endoscopy-mediated NOTES research has witnessed substantial progress. Objective: This study seeks to offer a bibliometric analysis of the trends and prospects within the NOTES domain. Methods: On January 3, 2026, this study utilized the Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC) to retrieve literature related to NOTES. The R package "Bibliometrix" was employed to provide fundamental bibliometric data. VOSviewer was instrumental in conducting keyword analysis, authors analysis, and co-occurrence analysis. Meanwhile, CiteSpace was employed for the analysis of reference bursts and keyword bursts. Moreover, we obtained clinical trial data published within the study period via the PubMed database, aiming to assess clinical advancements in this domain. Conclusion: This study identified a total of 2,196 publications spanning a 28-year period from 1998 to 2025. The United States led in the number of articles published, with
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.