Global Research Trends and Collaboration Networks in Paraphimosis: A Bibliometric Analysis of Web of Science Publications (2000–2024)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17155973Keywords:
Paraphimosis, Penis, Urologic Emergencies, Bibliometrics, Interinstitutional RelationsAbstract
Background:
Paraphimosis is a rare but clinically significant urological emergency that can lead to ischemic necrosis or penile loss if not promptly managed. Despite its clinical importance, the global research landscape on paraphimosis has not been systematically evaluated.
Methods:
A bibliometric analysis was conducted using the Web of Science Core Collection database. Original research articles published in English between 2000 and 2024 in journals indexed within the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) were included. Case reports, reviews, and non-original studies were excluded. Data were processed with Microsoft Excel (2016) and BibExcel, while VOSviewer (version 1.6.20) was used to generate visual maps. Analyses included co-authorship, co-occurrence, and bibliographic coupling, with productivity and impact assessed by citation counts, h-index, and citation sum within the h-core.
Results:
A total of 421 publications were retrieved, of which 130 original articles met the inclusion criteria. These involved 564 authors from 30 countries and were published in 76 journals. The United States was the most productive country, followed by Turkey, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Urology and the Journal of Sexual Medicine had the highest h-indices among journals. Keyword analysis showed that “paraphimosis,” “penile strangulation,” and “penile incarceration” were predominant, whereas diagnostic methods, treatment strategies, and long-term outcomes were underrepresented. Bibliographic coupling revealed fragmented clusters with limited international collaboration.
Conclusions:
This study provides the first comprehensive bibliometric mapping of paraphimosis research. Findings underscore the need for larger-scale, multicenter, and prospective studies, particularly involving low- and middle-income countries.
References
1. Offenbacher J, Barbera A. Penile Emergencies. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2019;37(4):583-592. doi:10.1016/j.emc.2019.07.001
2. Barberan Parraga C, Peng Y, Cen E, et al. Paraphimosis Pain Treatment with Nebulized Ketamine in the Emergency Department. J Emerg Med. 2022;62(3):e57-e59. doi:10.1016/j.jemermed.2021.12.011
3. Sato Y, Takagi S, Uchida K, et al. Long-term follow-up of penile glans necrosis due to paraphimosis. IJU Case Rep. 2019;2(4):171-173. Published 2019 Apr 10. doi:10.1002/iju5.12064
4. Davis JR, Baaklini GT, Schwope RB. The "Wet Collar" Sign: A Case of Paraphimosis on CT. Cureus. 2022;14(4):e24345. Published 2022 Apr 21. doi:10.7759/cureus.24345
5. Juvet T, Hayes JR, Ferrara S, Goche D, Macmillan RD, Singal RK. The burden of urological disease in Zomba, Malawi: A needs assessment in a sub-Saharan tertiary care center. Can Urol Assoc J. 2020;14(1):E6-E12. doi:10.5489/cuaj.5837
6. Osmonov D, Hamann C, Eraky A, et al. Preputioplasty as a surgical alternative in treatment of phimosis. Int J Impot Res. 2022;34(4):353-358. doi:10.1038/s41443-021-00505-9
7. van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics. 2010;84(2):523-538. doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
8. Donthu N, Gustafsson A. Effects of COVID-19 on business and research. J Bus Res. 2020;117:284-289. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.06.008
9. Donthu N, Kumar S, Mukherjee D, Pandey N, Lim WM. How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. J Bus Res. 2021;133:285-296.
10. Microsoft Corporation. Microsoft Excel. Version 2016. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Corporation; 2016. Available from: https://office.microsoft.com/excel
11. Persson O, Danell R, Schneider JW. How to use Bibexcel for various types of bibliometric analysis. In: Åström F, Danell R, Larsen B, Schneider JW, eds. Celebrating Scholarly Communication Studies: A Festschrift for Olle Persson at His 60th Birthday. Leuven, Belgium: International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics; 2009:9-24
12. Grandez-Urbina JA, Corrales-Acosta E, Tejeda-Mariaca JE, Pichardo-Rodriguez R, Garcia-Perdomo H. Case Report: Penile necrosis associated to paraphimosis with calciphylaxis due to terminal chronic kidney disease. F1000Res. 2019;8:1133. Published 2019 Jul 19. doi:10.12688/f1000research.18834.1
13. Morris BJ, Matthews JG, Krieger JN. Prevalence of phimosis in males of all ages: systematic review. Urology. 2020;135:124-32. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2019.10.003.
14. Kazımoğlu H, Dokur M. The top 100 cited articles on urological emergencies: A bibliometric analysis. Turk J Urol. 2018;44(3):239-250. doi:10.5152/tud.2017.82609
15. Hamza BK, Ahmed M, Tolani MA, et al. Spectrum of urological emergencies and surgical interventions in a single tertiary health center. Afr J Emerg Med. 2021;11(2):223-226. doi:10.1016/j.afjem.2021.02.003
16. Crocerossa F, Visser W, Carbonara U, et al. The impact the COVID-19 pandemic on urology literature: a bibliometric analysis. Cent European J Urol. 2022;75(1):102-109. doi:10.5173/ceju.2021.291
17. He L, Fang H, Wang X, et al. The 100 most-cited articles in urological surgery: A bibliometric analysis. Int J Surg. 2020;75:74-79. doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.12.030
18. Chen L, Lou Z, Fang Y, et al. Use of the bibliometric in rare diseases: taking Wilson disease personally. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2022;17(1):297. Published 2022 Jul 29. doi:10.1186/s13023-022-02459-7
19. Xu M, Li G, Li J, Xiong H, He S. Pharmacovigilance for rare diseases: a bibliometrics and knowledge-map analysis based on web of science. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2023;18(1):303. Published 2023 Sep 26. doi:10.1186/s13023-023-02915-y
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Veysi Siber, Çağrı Öktem
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
