Research trends in the field of the gut-brain interaction: Functional dyspepsia in the spotlight – An integrated bibliometric and science mapping approach
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objectives This study aims to perform a bibliometric analysis of functional dyspepsia (FD), which includes visualizing bibliographic information, in order to identify prevailing study themes, topics of interest, contributing journals, countries, institutions, and authors as well as co-citation patterns. Methods The Web of Science™ Core Collection Database was used to retrieve all peer-reviewed scientific publications related to FD research. The validated search terms were entered into the “title” and “author keywords” fields, and the results were sorted by publication year from 2006 to 2022. There were no restrictions on language. On 12 February 2023, a manual export of the complete metadata for each original publication and review article was performed. CiteSpace was used to reveal co-authorship, publication, and co-citation patterns to find prominent authors, organizations, countries, and journals in FD research as well as to identify author keywords with strong citation bursts, which could indicate an emerging research area. VOSviewer was used to build the co-occurrence indicator (co-word) to identify the main author keywords on which previous studies focused and to induce clustered scientific landscape for two consecutive periods to identify intriguing areas for future research. Results A search of the database retrieved 2,957 documents. There was a wave-like pattern in the number of publications until 2017, after which there was a spike in publication volume. The USA, China, and Japan provided the majority of contributions. In terms of institution, Mayo Clin, Univ Newcastle, and Katholieke Univ Leuven were found to be the prolific institutions. Additionally, the results indicate that eastern Asian researchers contributed significantly to the global knowledge of literature that led other countries; however, Canada, the USA, Australia, England, and Germany were found to have the highest degree of betweenness centrality. Nicholas J. Talley, Jan Tack, Gerald Holtmann, Michael Camilleri, Ken Haruma, and Paul Moayyedi occupied the top positions based on productivity and centrality indicators. Six thematic clusters emerged ( Helicobacter pylori infection; pathophysiological mechanisms of FD; extraintestinal co-morbidities and overlap syndromes associated with FD; herbal medicine in FD; diabetic gastroparesis; and dietary factors in FD). “Acupuncture,” “duodenal eosinophilia,” “gut microbiota,” and others were among the author keywords with rising prevalence. Conclusion In FD research, eastern Asian countries have established themselves as major contributors with the highest publishing productivity; however, research has primarily been driven by North America, Europe, and Australia, where cooperation is generally more active and highly influential scientific results are produced. Our analysis suggests that increased investments, training of human resources, improved infrastructures, and expanded collaborations are essential to improving the quality of FD research in Asia. The emerging author keyword analysis suggests that eosinophil-mast cell axis, gut microbiota, mental disorders, and acupuncture are the key areas that attract researchers’ attention as future research boulevards. There is a highly skewed distribution of research output across Asia, with most focus on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) coming from Chinese, Japanese, and South Korean centers. However, CAM remains an underexplored area of research in the context of FD, and it deserves greater research efforts in order to obtain quality scientific evidence. Furthermore, we propose that the research framework of CAM should not be limited to dysmotility; rather, it could be interpreted within a more holistic context that includes the brain-gut-microbiota axis, as well as novel concepts such as duodenitis, increased mucosal permeability, and infiltration and activation of eosinophils and mast cells, among others. Overall, we provided bibliometrics-based overviews of relevant literature to researchers from different backgrounds and healthcare professionals to provide an in-depth overview of major trends in FD research.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Étiquettes directes de modèles (non validées)
Étiquettes de catégorie et de devis d'étude par modèle, issues des rondes d'étiquetage. C'est une sortie machine, non validée, et le désaccord entre modèles est livré comme donnée. Aucun devis ici n'est encore validé contre MEDLINE.
| Bras | Catégories | Devis d'étude | Confiance |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Bibliométrie Domaine: non disponible · Genre: Synthèse Porte sur le système de recherche canadien: non · Porte sur un sujet canadien: non | Observationnel | high |
| gpt | Bibliométrie Domaine: non disponible · Genre: Synthèse Porte sur le système de recherche canadien: non · Porte sur un sujet canadien: non | Autre devis | high |
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,008 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,029 | 0,181 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéeÉtiqueté directement par 2 modèles lisant le dossier complet.
Les modèles divergent sur des parties de cette classification; chaque voix est préservée dans la section en fin de page.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».