ReviewMedicine2026
A bibliometric review of peripherally inserted central catheters: Knowledge domain mapping and research trends.
Review in Medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are commonly used vascular access devices in clinical practice. Due to their numerous advantages, PICCs are widely used globally. However, after decades of iteration and clinical application, while benefiting patients, PICCs also face new opportunities and challenges. Therefore, this study systematically analyzes the current status of global PICCs research through bibliometric methods and predicts future research directions and hotspots, aiming to provide references for further development and innovation of PICCs.
methodsCiteSpace, VOSviewer, and the bibliometrix R-package were used to perform descriptive statistics and data visualization analyses on literature from the Web of Science Core Collection. A total of 2102 articles were selected, originating from 2722 institutions across 105 countries.
resultsThe United States has the greatest influence in the field of PICC research, with the Michigan Health System being the most prolific institution, and Vineet Chopra being the most influential scholar. Keyword and co-citation analysis reveal hot topics: PICC catheterization techniques, complications, and clinical quality control of PICCs.
conclusionResearch on PICCs is showing trends of global collaboration and interdisciplinary approaches. Artificial intelligence and other medical auxiliary technologies demonstrate great potential in addressing PICC complications and insertion challenges. Establishing efficient vascular access teams and solving PICC care issues based on evidence-based practices are crucial for ensuring quality control during PICC usage.
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.