ArticleInternational journal of preventive medicine2026
A Scientometric Exploration of
Article in International journal of preventive 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
Background: Methods: A descriptive scientometric study with an exploratory approach was conducted. The search was performed in Scopus on June 7, 2025, using the strategy with Boolean operators and broad terms related to Hp and GC. Documents published between January 2019 and June 2025 were selected. The analysis was performed using SciVal, Bibliometrix (R), and VOSviewer, exploring performance indicators, collaborative networks, and thematic evolution. The report was guided by the Reporting and Measurement of Items for Bibliometric or Scientometric Studies in Health Sciences (RAMIBS) guideline. Results: A total of 4573 documents discussed were obtained from 1445 sources. The number of documents obtained each year declined on average (-8.74%), with an average of 14.09 citations per document (high collaboration rate at 20%), with high impact authors (P. Malfertheiner, h-index 99, countries such as China, Japan, and United States), and the leading journals of Helicobacter and Gastroenterology for productivity and impact in the field. The amount of output was highly concentrated based upon Bradford's Law (46 core journals identified) and there was a strong bibliographic core (in co-citation), whilst thematic evolution showed that the focus of scholarship has evolved from virulence factors focused to integrative approaches around antimicrobial resistance, microbiome, and artificial intelligence. Conclusions: The field of research on Hp and GC is an established and collaborative domain currently undergoing a methodological change. The study presents the roadmap that provides guidance for future scientific production and making editorial and clinical decisions.
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.