Hydrogel research in peripheral nerve injury repair: a comprehensive multi-database bibliometric analysis (2015-2025)

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

• 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

Abstract (original English)

Background Peripheral nerve injury (PNI) represents a significant clinical challenge with limited therapeutic efficacy. Hydrogel scaffolds, which mimic the natural neural extracellular matrix, have emerged as promising biomaterials for nerve regeneration. However, clinical translation is constrained by material stability issues and insufficient integration with host biological systems. This bibliometric analysis aims to map the evolving research landscape and identify emerging trends to guide future therapeutic development. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted across Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC), Scopus, PubMed from January 2015 to October 2025. Following deduplication and eligibility screening, 502 articles were included for bibliometric analysis. Publication trends, collaborative networks, and thematic evolution were analyzed using VOSviewer, CiteSpace, SCImago Graphica, and the R package bibliometrix. Results The field demonstrated substantial growth over the decade, with publication volume increasing from 10 papers in 2015 to 80 in 2023. China dominated research output (55.0% of publications), though studies from the United States and Canada achieved higher average citation impact. Five major research clusters were identified, with significant focus on conductive hydrogels and Schwann cell-mediated regeneration. Thematic analysis revealed a para

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.