article · Current Research in Biotechnology
Modern biomedical science is characterized by a rapid increase in the volume of scientific publications and the growing complexity of the research landscape, which reinforces the need for quantitative methods of analyzing scientific literature, including bibliometrics. This graphical review aims to systematize the methodological approaches to bibliometric analysis and its areas of application in the health sciences, as well as to present visual guidelines for analyzing the structure, dynamics, and interconnections of the biomedical research landscape. The paper examines the key stages of bibliometric research, from the development of search strategies and data processing to methods of scientific mapping and visualization, which allow the identification of thematic clusters and research trends. The main directions of bibliometric application in the health sciences are systematized, including disease research, clinical trial analysis, pharmaceutical development, public health, precision medicine, digital health, mental health, the study of medical misinformation, and issues related to chronic diseases and population aging. Bibliometric analysis offers a quantitative and scalable approach to exploring scientific literature, enabling the identification of key thematic areas, collaboration networks, and emerging trends in biomedical research. Its limitations include database coverage, language and regional biases, disciplinary differences, citation delays, and the fact that citations do not necessarily indicate endorsement. Future developments in bibliometrics are linked to integrating artificial intelligence, machine learning, and semantic analysis, as well as combining bibliometric methods with systematic reviews to enable deeper insights into scientific knowledge. Thus, bibliometrics represents a powerful tool for analyzing the structure and dynamics of health sciences research and can inform strategic decision-making in science policy and healthcare system development.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1016/j.crbiot.2026.100414
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
