Global research status and trends in macrodactyly research: Bibliometric and visualized analysis from 2005 to 2025
Liu Y., Yang ZY., Pang CJ., Fan XB., Zhao CY., Wei ZK.
Laboratory Study, published in Medicine (Baltimore) (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Laboratory Study
- Journal
- Medicine (Baltimore) (2026)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 41861168
- PMCID
- PMC13008167
- DOI
- 10.1097/md.0000000000048130
Abstract (original English)
Background To provide a comprehensive bibliometric and visualized analysis of global macrodactyly research from 2005 to 2025, identify publication trends, leading contributors, research hotspots, and emerging directions in this rare congenital disorder. Methods Publications from January 1,2005 to November 31,2025 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. English-language articles and reviews were included using the search terms "macrodactyly," "megalodactyly," "digital gigantism," and "giant digit." After removing duplicates, retracted items, and non-relevant records, eligible studies were analyzed. Microsoft Excel, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace were used to evaluate publication trends, geographic distribution, collaboration networks, and keyword co-occurrence patterns. Results A total of 162 publications met the inclusion criteria. Annual output increased steadily, with peaks in 2014 and 2020, and a strong upward cumulative trend (R2 = 0.9933). Research was mainly concentrated in the USA, China, and Europe, with limited intercontinental collaboration. Author and institutional analyses revealed several distinct collaboration clusters. Keyword co-occurrence and temporal mapping demonstrated a shift from early clinical and surgical topics toward molecular and genetic research, particularly involving PIK3CA-related mechanisms. Conclusion Macrodactyly research has expanded
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.