SynthesisFrontiers in surgery2026
Research trends in minimally invasive partial splenectomy: a bibliometric mapping review with cross-database comparison.
Synthesis 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Minimally invasive partial splenectomy (MIPS) is used for hereditary hematologic disorders, splenic cysts, hydatid disease, benign tumors, and selected traumatic lesions. However, its literature remains dispersed across patient groups, indications, and surgical specialties. This study mapped the development, contributors, knowledge base, and thematic structure of MIPS research and examined the concordance of its principal patterns across databases. Methods: Articles and reviews published from 1 January 1995 to 29 August 2026 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC), Scopus, and PubMed. WoSCC supported the primary bibliometric and knowledge-mapping analyses; Scopus and PubMed supported cross-database comparisons. Bibliometrix, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace were used to analyze publication output, contributors, keywords, co-cited references, and citation bursts. Database overlap, annual-output correlations, and journal and theme descriptive agreement were also assessed. Results: The final datasets comprised 150 WoSCC, 154 Scopus, and 161 PubMed publications. WoSCC output increased after 2015 and reached 15 publications in 2024, the highest total among complete years. China contributed the most publications ( Conclusion: MIPS research has expanded but remains relatively small, institutionally dispersed, and focused on operative feasibility, technical refinement, and perioperative outcomes. These broad patterns were consistent across the three databases, although the comparisons do not constitute independent external validation. Disease-stratified multicenter studies with standardized long-term assessment of splenic function are needed.
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.