A bibliometric and visualized analysis of liver fibrosis from 2002 to 2022
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fibrosis of the liver is a degenerative alteration that occurs in the majority of chronic liver disorders. Further progression can lead to cirrhosis, liver failure, and hepatocellular carcinoma, which can seriously affect the health and lives of patients. The field of liver fibrosis research has flourished in the last 20 years, with approximately 9000 articles retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection database alone. In order to identify future research hotspots and potential paths in a thorough and scientifically reliable manner, it is important to organize and visualize the research on this topic from a holistic and very general perspective. This study used bibliometric analysis with CiteSpace and VOSviewer software to provide a quantitative analysis, hotspot mining, and commentary of articles published in the field of liver fibrosis over the last 20 years. This bibliometric analysis contains a total of 8994 articles with 45667 authors from 6872 institutions in 97 countries, published in 1371 journals and citing 156 309 references. The literature volume has steadily increased over the last 20 years. Research has focused on gastroenterology and hepatology, pharmacology and pharmacy, and medicine, research, and experimental areas. We found that the pathological mechanisms, diagnostic and quantitative methods, etiology, and antifibrotic strategies constitute the knowledge structure of liver fibrosis. Finding mechanisms for liver fibrosis regression, identifying precise noninvasive diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers, and creating efficient liver fibrosis patient treatments are the main goals of current research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.164 | 0.196 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".