Scientific landscape and trend analysis of keloid research: a 30-year bibliometric review

BACKGROUND: Keloids remain troublesome for clinicians because of the lack of standard therapy, and the underlying mechanisms are still unclear. Bibliometric analysis could be a powerful tool to comprehensively review research trends, evaluate publication performances and provide future perspectives. There is no bibliometric analysis focusing on keloid research. METHODS: Keloid related publications were searched in Web of Science Core Collection from the publication year 1990 to 2019. Bibliometric data were provided on document type, annual publication number, most productive journals, publication geography, top potential authors, and highly cited articles. The distribution of single words in article titles was analyzed to evaluate the main research focuses and determine their development trends. Word cluster analysis was further performed to detect emerging trends in keloid research. RESULTS: The number of annual articles increased from 24 in 1990 to 63 in 2006 and then increased sharply, reaching 139 in 2019. Dermatologic Surgery published the highest number of articles followed by Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. The USA ranked top with six publication indicators and China had a dramatic increase in the annual number of articles since 2012. Recent research hotspots include underlying pathogenetic mechanisms, keloid treatment, and therapeutic effect evaluation. DISCUSSION: Keloids remain a research focus. Efforts will be continuously made to understand the underlying mechanism of keloid formation. Despite many treatment modalities, there is no gold standard for keloid treatment, and many efforts are being made in the exploration of new therapies. Moreover, it is foreseeable that objective measurement tools will have a higher status in the assessment of keloids and scars.