ReviewMedicine2026
Forging new insights in forensic microbiome studies: A 2000 to 2024 bibliometric analysis redefining the landscape.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMicrobial diversity has been extensively studied across various fields, including medicine and therapeutics. Its application in forensics is rapidly expanding due to its effectiveness. This study aimed to conduct a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of global research on forensic microbiome, providing a foundational knowledge framework for this emerging field.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was performed using the Web of Science Core Collection database to identify publications related to the forensic microbiome. Annual publication output, research collaborations, research hotspots, and developmental trends in this field were analyzed using bibliometric software (VOSviewer and CiteSpace).
resultsIn total, 709 articles published between 2000 and 2024 were selected. The first study in this field was published in 2000. Recently, the number of publications and citations has grown significantly. Cooperation network analysis revealed that the United States of America contributes the most to forensic microbiome research, with the highest publication volume. Michigan State University emerged as the most prolific institution. Forensic Science International is the most productive journal in this field. Carter David O. contributed the most to the articles and is the most co-cited authors. Keywords cluster analysis identified 4 major research clusters: bacteria, forensic medicine, 16s ribosomal ribonucleic acid, and machine learning. Machine learning, human microbiome, and forensic microbiology have attracted increasing attention from researchers.
conclusionThis bibliometric analysis provides a data-driven and objective overview of forensic microbiome research currently, offering readers a valuable reference for future research. Our review provides insights into contemporary trends, global patterns of collaboration, fundamental knowledge, high-interest research areas, and emerging frontiers in the forensic microbiome.
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.