4.1 Review

Global publication trends and research hotspots of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a bibliometric analysis and systematic review

期刊

SPRINGERPLUS
卷 4, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING AG
DOI: 10.1186/s40064-015-1542-1

关键词

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease; Bibliometrics; Metabolic syndrome; Insulin resistance; Epidemiology; Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81173393]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Tianjin City [12JCZDJC25500]
  3. Innovation Team Program from Logistics University of the Chinese People's Armed Police Force [WHTD201310]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With the globally increasing prevalence, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) becomes the predominant cause of chronic liver disease. A global look at the publication trends and the research hotspots of NAFLD are urgently needed to assess the situation of NAFLD research. The global scientific research in the Science Citation Index-Expanded covered articles relevant to NAFLD was retrieved and its bibliometric parameters and research hotspots of NAFLD were systematically evaluated. To sum up, 6356 articles were published in 994 different journals covering 93 SCI subject categories during 1986-2013, in which English was the most predominant language used. Starting from the late 1980s, the publication on NAFLD grew slowly and entered into a highly developing period in the 21st century, especially in the last decade. Besides hepatic steatosis, metabolic syndrome and its combination of symptoms such as obesity, insulin resistance are listed as the top frequent keywords. Bibliometric results suggest that the obviously rapid growth of the articles in recent years appears to be associated with the accelerating incidence of NAFLD and its cofactors such as metabolic syndrome. In addition, epidemiology focusing on comparing different regions and population is attracting ever-growing attention. Meantime, pathology plays an important role in NAFLD research.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据