4.5 Review

Bibliometric analysis of global research on the role of apolipoprotein E in Alzheimer's disease

期刊

HELIYON
卷 9, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17987

关键词

Alzheimer 's disease; Apolipoprotein E; Biomarker; Mechanism; Risk factor

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Alzheimer's disease (AD) has seen significant growth in research in the past decade, with a focus on the role of apolipoprotein E. This study conducted a bibliometric analysis to identify trends in global research, finding that the USA and the University of California were prominent in this field. The most productive author was Zetterberg H, and Petersen RC was the most cited author. The analysis also revealed shifts in research focus towards tau mechanisms and genetic risk factors.
Alzheimer's disease (AD) has attracted considerable attention from the public and scientific researchers, leading to a rapid growth in relevant research on this disorder in the last 10 years. The present study aimed to conduct a bibliometric analysis to elucidate the trends of global research on the role of apolipoprotein E in AD in the past decade. Three bibliometric software (CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and R Bibliometrix) were used to analyze the active journals, countries/regions, institutes, authors, co-cited references, and keywords in this field. The USA was the most influential country, and the University of California was the most productive institute. Zetterberg H contributed the highest number of publications, and Petersen RC was the most cited author in this field. On the basis of the co-cited reference analysis, knowledge base on biomarkers, risk factors, and mechanisms were updated in the past decade. Current research hotspots are shifting to tau related mechanisms and identification of genetic risk factors. Our study provides insights into the developing knowledge base and trends related to research on apolipoprotein E in AD, which may provide new directions for further research in this field.

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

4.5
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