DOI 10.1007/s00266-025-05473-9
Research Trends and Hotspots in Hypertrophic Scar: A Bibliometric Analysis over the Past Five Decades.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
This study aims to conduct a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of research trends and hotspots in hypertrophic scar studies over the past five decades.
METHOD: This study conducted a comprehensive literature search on hypertrophic scars using the Web of Science Core Collection. Bibliometric analysis was performed with VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and the R package "bibliometrix," visualizing collaboration networks, keyword co-occurrence networks, and emerging research trends in the field.
RESULTS
This study included 3732 publications authored by 14,936 researchers from 7,054 institutions across 657 countries/regions. Ogawa Rei was among the most prolific authors (n = 47). Shanghai Jiao Tong University led with 258 publications. Wound Repair and Regeneration was a high-impact journal in this field. Keyword analysis identified two primary clusters: molecular and cellular mechanisms, and clinical management. Burst analysis of keywords revealed a significant increase in research focus on topics such as "triamcinolone" and "fractional CO2 laser."
CONCLUSION
This study indicated that molecular mechanisms and therapeutic strategies remained focal points in hypertrophic scar research. Additionally, emerging therapies, such as triamcinolone and fractional CO2 laser, showed potential to advance treatment approaches. These findings provided critical insights for shaping future research directions.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.