Update in Outpatient General Internal Medicine: Practice-Changing Evidence Published in 2025.

This bibliometric study aims to comprehensively map the evolution of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening research in high-risk populations and to conduct a comparative analysis across the three major etiologies: hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). Publications were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (inception to September 4, 2025). Bibliometric analyses were performed using VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and Excel, with etiology-specific subsets created for comparative analysis. A total of 1422 publications were analyzed. The field experienced exponential growth after 2007, with distinct trajectories: HBV research showed steady growth, HCV exhibited volatility, MASLD accelerated rapidly since 2019. The United States and China dominated contributions (53.52%). Dr. Amit G. Singal was the most prolific and influential author. Core journals were predominantly high-impact Q1 journals. Co-citation analysis reveals that the intellectual foundation is primarily built upon authoritative guidelines and seminal studies. Keyword analysis delineated three main themes: etiologies and high-risk populations, screening concepts and outcomes, and methodologies. Keyword burst analysis revealed three phases: early focus on AFP and viral etiologies; a shift toward risk stratification; and the current phase characterized by technological advances such as MRI. The field of HCC screening in high-risk populations has shifted from viral to metabolic etiologies, from basic tools (AFP, ultrasound) to advanced technologies (MRI), and from universal screening toward risk stratification and personalized surveillance. Future research should focus on abbreviated MRI and the development of etiology-specific precision risk stratification tools to optimize screening strategies.

Medical Student First Authorship in High-Impact Surgical Journals: Longitudinal Trends and Institutional Concentration, 2000-2025.

Scoping reviews are widely used across the health sciences to map evidence, clarify concepts, and identify knowledge gaps. Although protocol development and registration are increasingly encouraged, empirical evidence describing contemporary registration practices remains limited. This study aimed to evaluate current practices in scoping review protocol registration and reporting in high-impact health sciences journals published between 2024 and 2025. We conducted an empirical meta-research study of scoping reviews published in first-quartile journals according to the Journal Citation Reports and indexed in PubMed. Data were extracted independently using a standardized form and included protocol registration status, registry platform, public accessibility, peer-reviewed protocol publication, reported protocol components, and methodological guidance cited. Descriptive analyses were used to assess registration patterns and methodological consistency. Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to explore factors associated with protocol registration reporting and the presence of a peer-reviewed protocol. Among 2,546 screened records, 1,267 scoping reviews underwent full data extraction. Overall, 549 reviews reported a registered protocol, of which 483 were publicly accessible and included in the analysis. Protocol registration was identified in 43.3% of scoping reviews, while peer-reviewed protocol publication was rare (5.1%). Most protocols were registered on the Open Science Framework (OSF) (n = 478). Protocol content frequently included core methodological elements but also reported additional items beyond those addressed in the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. Although many methodological documents were cited, only two provided explicit guidance for scoping review protocol development. Post hoc analyses identified substantial heterogeneity in protocol registration practices across journals, publishers, and corresponding author countries, suggesting that registration practices are influenced by a combination of editorial policies, local research cultures, and differing methodological perspectives. Protocol registration practices in scoping reviews remain heterogeneous across high-impact health sciences journals. The findings demonstrate substantial variability in protocol content, registration approaches, and use of methodological guidance, while reinforcing ongoing methodological discussions regarding protocol registration and standardization in scoping reviews.

Blinding of patients, clinicians and outcome assessors is a key measure for minimising bias in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). In trials of psychological interventions, where outcome measures often use subjective measures, the blinding of outcome assessors is particularly important. However, there are few guidelines on how blinding of outcome assessors can be achieved in practice. The aim of this study was to identify procedures used for blinding outcome assessors in RCTs of psychological interventions. A narrative review was conducted through a PubMed database search covering the period from January 2023 to December 2024, restricted to studies published in the six highest impact factor journals in the field of psychiatry and mental health. Studies were included if they were (1) an RCT and (2) focused on psychological intervention(s). Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the study characteristics, and content analysis of the published reports was conducted to describe the methods used to maintain blinding of outcome assessors. Fifty-two eligible studies were identified which reported on RCTs of psychological interventions. Of those, the majority reported that outcome assessors were blinded to participants' treatment allocation (n = 44, 85%). Of the studies with blinded outcome assessors, 27 reported information on the procedures used to maintain blinding (61%). Methods for maintaining blinding were avoiding unblinding by participants (n = 16), tracking and assessing blinding efficacy (n = 12), replacing unblinded assessors (n = 11), managing communication within the team (n = 9), clear designation of blind and unblind staff roles (n = 8) and management of records (n = 6). The majority of studies reported a single method for maintaining blinding of outcome assessors. While the majority of RCTs of psychological interventions reported that outcome assessors were blind to participants' treatment allocation, there was often no or minimal information about procedures used to maintain blinding. A limitation of this study is that it was restricted to RCTs reported in high-impact journals so it does not provide a comprehensive review of all relevant studies. Maintaining blinding of outcome assessors requires substantial planning and efforts throughout the conduct of an RCT and this should be reported so that conclusions drawn from RCTs can be made with confidence.

EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of Health Research) reporting guidelines aim to improve transparency and completeness in biomedical research; however, their adoption remains inconsistent across medical specialties. We quantified declared reporting guideline use in high-impact ophthalmology journals and assessed whether editorial policies are associated with their implementation across specialties. We conducted a cross-sectional study of original research articles published in 2024 across five first-quartile ophthalmology journals. Reporting guideline use was identified through systematic full-text searches. An "advisable use rate" was defined as the proportion of articles declaring guideline use among those for which use was methodologically appropriate. Journal enforcement policies were characterized through analysis of instructions for authors. Guideline use in ophthalmology was contextualized through comparison with previously published datasets from orthopedics, rheumatology, and infectious diseases. Among 794 original research articles, reporting guidelines were deemed advisable for 672 (84.6%). Of these, 192 articles (28.6%) declared guideline use. Advisable use rates ranged from 5% to 120% across journals. STROBE was the most frequently applicable guideline but was declared in only 27% of eligible articles. Ophthalmology guideline use exceeded orthopedics (10.2%), rheumatology (7.2%), and infectious diseases (6.3%). Although enforcement policies varied across journals, no significant correlation was observed between enforcement level and guideline use (Kendall's τ = 0.24, p > 0.05). Despite higher adoption relative to other specialties, reporting guideline use in ophthalmology remains limited. Substantial inter-journal variability and the absence of an association between enforcement policies and use highlight opportunities to better align editorial expectations with reporting practices.

Authorship and citation inequities in high-impact emergency medicine journals: a bibliometric analysis.

Research on mental fatigue in ball sports (2000-2025): A bibliometric analysis.

The composition of clinical trial populations influences the interpretation and generalizability of cancer trial results. The extent to which geographic and socioeconomic characteristics are reported in primary cancer clinical trial publications is unknown. To evaluate the frequency and temporal trends in reporting of geographic, socioeconomic, and demographic characteristics in primary publications of US-based randomized cancer clinical trials. This systematic review included US-based randomized phase II or III cancer treatment trials published in high-impact peer-reviewed journals from 2020 to 2025. Using prespecified search strategies and eligibility criteria, primary trial reports were identified. Data were abstracted on reporting of rurality, area-level deprivation, insurance status, income, education, age, sex, race, and ethnicity. Overall prevalence and temporal trends in reporting of geographic, socioeconomic, and demographic characteristics. Among 6681 reviewed trials, 441 met inclusion criteria. Reporting of age and sex was nearly universal. Reporting of race and ethnicity was common, with 365 trials (82.8%) reporting more than 1 category. The most frequently reported race variables were White (356 [80.7%]), Asian (330 [74.8%]), and Black (320 [72.6%]); Hispanic ethnicity was reported in 140 trials (31.8%). Reporting of any race or ethnicity increased from 62.3% (38 of 62) in 2020 to 93.9% (77 of 82) in 2025. In contrast, no trials reported rurality, income, or area deprivation; 2 reported education, and 1 reported insurance. In this systematic review of 441 US-based randomized cancer clinical trials, geographic and socioeconomic characteristics were rarely reported despite increasing attention to social determinants of health. Limited reporting of these characteristics may constrain assessment of trial generalizability and interpretation across diverse populations and care settings.

As a key mechanosensitive ion channel, Piezo1 plays a critical role in various brain functions, including the regulation of cerebral blood flow and neuronal excitability, by converting mechanical stimuli into biochemical signals. This study conducted a quantitative and visual analysis of the global research landscape, evolving trends, and knowledge structure of Piezo1 in brain research from 2014 to 2025. A comprehensive bibliometric analysis was conducted. We conducted a comprehensive literature search in the Web of Science and Scopus databases for publications focusing on Piezo1 in the brain from January 1, 2014, to October 1, 2025. After rigorous screening and deduplication, 173 studies were finally included in the analysis. Scientometric indicators and visualization tools were employed to examine publication trends, core journals, productive authors and countries, and keyword co-occurrence networks. Annual publication output in this field increased rapidly, with an average growth rate of 34.48%. Research publications are concentrated in a limited number of high-impact journals, reflecting a strong academic focus. Keyword analysis identified core research hotspots, including "mechanotransduction," "ion channels," and "neuroinflammation," highlighting the pivotal role of Piezo1 in cerebral hemodynamics and neuropathology. Intellectual structure analysis revealed that foundational mechanistic studies dominate the current literature. Although basic research on Piezo1 in the brain has advanced significantly, studies directly targeting its clinical translation are limited. These findings highlight a clear knowledge gap between mechanistic understanding and therapeutic applications. Future research should prioritize bridging this gap by fostering interdisciplinary collaborations that translate fundamental insights into clinical validation, thereby accelerating the development of Piezo1 as a novel therapeutic target for neurological disorders.

Traditional village protection and sustainable development: Knowledge graph construction and hotspot evolution

Rising global Ties in orthopaedic research: A 30-year analysis of high-impact journals.

Trends and disparities in female authorship in surgical publications: A large-scale bibliometric study using natural language processing.

Plant-based meat substitutes: Trends, challenges, and opportunities from a bibliometric and systematic approach

Artificial Intelligence-Driven Mapping of Global Microsurgery Research: Dual Automation for Data and Classification.

Cardiac anesthesiology continues to evolve as new evidence reshapes practice across multiple domains of patient care. The pace and volume of publication make it increasingly difficult for clinicians to identify studies that are most likely to change day-to-day practice. We performed a structured search of major bibliographic databases and targeted high-impact journals to identify significant cardiac anesthesia research published in 2025. Of 639 records identified, 24 publications were selected by three reviewers based on methodological rigor, clinical relevance, and anticipated impact on perioperative management. The included literature clustered into six themes: prevention of acute kidney injury, blood conservation and coagulation management, multimodal analgesia and opioid-sparing strategies, Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols with emphasis on ventilation strategies and delirium prevention, point-of-care ultrasound applications, and workforce sustainability. Together, these studies highlight a continued shift from reactive rescue to proactive optimization-before, during, and after cardiac surgery. This review summarizes the most practice-informing cardiac anesthesiology publications from 2025 to support evidence-based decision-making at the bedside.

Medical student research engagement is increasingly important in residency selection and professional development, yet structured, longitudinal mentorship programs remain limited, particularly in underserved settings. Inconsistent access to mentors and growing reliance on artificial intelligence tools further threaten the development of rigorous research skills. Scalable solutions are needed to provide equitable, high-quality research training. A structured clinical research enterprise was developed under faculty mentorship and formally launched in 2019 at an academic medical center. The program recruits first-year medical students annually and engages them in a four-year longitudinal model emphasizing progressive leadership, interdisciplinary collaboration, and continuous mentorship. Students complete standardized onboarding, participate in multidisciplinary projects, attend biweekly team meetings, and use centralized digital infrastructure to manage projects. Defined roles for students, a research assistant, and the principal investigator evolve across training levels. Institutional funding supports administrative staff, biostatistical resources, and conference participation. Between 2019 and 2025, the group produced 28 peer-reviewed publications (4.6 per year) with a mean of 5.0 citations per article, achieved within a seven-year citation window. This compares favorably to a benchmark bibliometric analysis of medical student publications from 1980-2010 reporting 4.5 citations per article. Seventeen percent of publications were cited in clinical documents, and 68% appeared in high-impact journals (impact factor >5). Qualitative outcomes included improved professional identity formation, confidence in clinical environments, and preparedness for residency. Program enrollment expanded to over 50 active student researchers across three medical schools. The model is being piloted for institutional expansion by recruiting additional faculty mentors. Formal program evaluation will assess long-term career outcomes, research involvement, and residency match success. The enterprise aims to serve as a scalable framework to improve equity, access, and excellence in medical student research training.

To systematically map the global evolution, collaborative networks, knowledge structure, and emerging research hotspots in robot-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC) using bibliometric and visualization techniques. A comprehensive bibliometric analysis was conducted using the Web of Science Core Collection (2005-2025). Publications were retrieved using predefined search strategies and screened according to strict inclusion criteria. CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and R software were employed to analyze publication trends, co-authorship networks, institutional and national collaborations, co-citation patterns, keyword co-occurrence, and research bursts. Knowledge mapping techniques were used to visualize thematic evolution and intellectual structure. A total of 926 eligible publications were included. Global output demonstrated a continuous and marked increase, particularly after 2016, with citations following a similar upward trajectory, reflecting growing academic impact. The United States dominated both publication output and citation influence, while collaboration networks remained largely regionally clustered with limited cross-national integration. Research was primarily concentrated in high-impact surgical journals, with foundational contributions emphasizing feasibility, safety, and comparative effectiveness. Keyword and co-citation analyses revealed a knowledge structure centered on laparoscopic surgery, bile duct injury, and robotic systems, with emerging clusters highlighting artificial intelligence (AI) and surgical education. Evolutionary trajectory analysis demonstrated a transition from technical feasibility (early stage), to safety and evidence-based evaluation (middle stage), and to training and technological integration (recent stage). Burst detection further identified recent hotspots in AI, cost-effectiveness, and surgical training systems. Emerging evidence also indicates increasing integration of AI-driven systems into RAC, enabling intraoperative decision support, workflow recognition, and early-stage semi-autonomous surgical execution, particularly in standardized procedures such as cholecystectomy. RAC research has evolved from early exploratory studies toward increasing technological integration and methodological refinement. Although RAC is not currently among the most dominant clinical indications for robotic surgery, it provides a valuable model for studying surgical standardization, training systems, and emerging intelligent surgical technologies. While current applications remain largely assistive, emerging advances in AI and robotic technologies suggest the potential for future development toward more intelligent and partially automated surgical systems. However, most evidence currently remains experimental and has not yet translated into widespread clinical practice. Future research should focus on strengthening global collaboration, improving high-quality evidence generation, and carefully evaluating the safety, feasibility, and clinical applicability of emerging intelligent surgical technologies.

Limited representation of authors from low- and middle-income countries in trials with participants from LMICs across 15 years (2008-2023).

To conduct a bibliometric analysis of the research literature on optogenetics in the field of cancer. A literature search and screening were performed using the query "ALL FIELD = (Cancer) AND ALL FIELD = (Optogenetics)" in the Core Collection database of Web of Science. Bibliometric analyses at the levels of country, institution, journal, author, and keyword were carried out using CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and the Bibliometrix online platform. Additionally, co-citation and keyword clustering analyses were performed. A total of 304 articles published between 2009 and September 2025 (including early online and pending publications) were identified, sourced from 146 different journals. The average publication time was 4.7 years, with an average citation count of 44.76 per article. A total of 791 unique author keywords were identified, corresponding to 2,215 distinct authors, including one single-author article. The analysis reveals that research on optogenetics in cancer remains vibrant, with a consistent increase in publication volume over the years. Research is primarily concentrated in economically advanced countries such as the United States and China. High-impact journals, such as Nature Communications, publish the majority of these studies. Leading authors are primarily from China and the United States, with research hotspots emerging in recent years. "Optogenetics" has emerged as the dominant keyword, with research topics shifting from early studies on optical control to more recent areas, such as engineered bacteria and differentiation. Current research trends in optogenetics and cancer focus on engineered bacteria, differentiation, and the exploration of cellular signaling mechanisms. Future research should prioritize the development of optogenetic cancer cell models and the investigation of underlying cellular pathway mechanisms. Moreover, future studies integrating optogenetic control with immunotherapeutic strategies may offer transformative advances in cancer treatment.