ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Global research trends in robotic single-site and single-port gynecologic surgery: a bibliometric and visualization analysis.
Article in Journal of robotic 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Robotic single-site and single-port gynecologic surgery has attracted increasing attention with the continued development of minimally invasive and robotic techniques, yet its overall research landscape has not been systematically characterized. This study aimed to evaluate the global publication landscape, knowledge structure, and evolving hotspots of this field using bibliometric and visualization methods. Publications related to robotic single-site and single-port gynecologic surgery were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection on April 23, 2026. Only English-language articles and reviews published up to December 31, 2025 were included. A full dataset of 308 publications was used for the main bibliometric analysis, and a field-specific sensitivity dataset of 264 publications was constructed after manual eligibility assessment to evaluate the influence of broadly related background literature. Because the literature in the full dataset spanned earlier robotic single-site/R-LESS approaches and more recent dedicated single-port platforms such as the da Vinci SP system, the retrieved literature was interpreted as a related technical spectrum rather than a completely homogeneous surgical field. Overall publication output showed a progressive upward trend over time. The USA was the leading contributor in both publication volume and citation impact, while Italy, Korea, and China also showed notable research activity. Several high-output institutions and core author groups contributed substantially to the development of this literature. The Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology and Journal of Robotic Surgery were among the most productive publication sources. Citation and co-citation analyses indicated that the knowledge base included both field-specific studies on robotic single-site/single-port gynecologic surgery and broader background literature on minimally invasive and robotic surgery. Keyword analysis suggested that research themes have shifted from early emphasis on feasibility, cervical cancer, lymphadenectomy, and surgical outcomes toward minimally invasive refinement and newer robotic platforms such as da Vinci SP. These findings provide an updated descriptive map of the publication landscape and thematic evolution of robotic single-site and single-port gynecologic surgery, while highlighting the need for standardized terminology, platform-specific evidence, and cautious interpretation of bibliometric trends.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42474570What 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.