Studies on Cistanches Herba: A Bibliometric Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a famous tonic herb, Cistanches Herba is known for its broad medicinal functions, especially its hormone balancing, anti-aging, anti-dementia, anti-tumor, anti-oxidative, neuroprotective, and hepatoprotective effects. This study aims to provide a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of studies on Cistanche and to identify research hotspots and frontier topics on the genus. Based on the metrological analysis software CiteSpace, 443 Cistanche related papers were quantitatively reviewed. The results indicate that 330 institutions from 46 countries have publications in this field. China was the leading country in terms of research importance and number of publication (335 articles). In the past decades, studies on Cistanche have mainly focused on its rich active substances and pharmacological effects. Although the research trend shows that Cistanche has grown from an endangered species to an important industrial plant, its breeding and cultivation continue to be important areas for research. In the future, the application of Cistanche species as functional foods may be a new research trend. In addition, active collaborations among researchers, institutions, and countries are expected.
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 | 0.006 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.180 | 0.197 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".