Navigating the complex interplay between autophagy and hepatocellular carcinoma: a correspondence

Dear Editor,

The exhaustive bibliometric and visual analytical study conducted by He et al. titled ‘Global research status and frontiers concerning autophagy in hepatocellular carcinoma: a comprehensive bibliometric and visualized analysis,” furnishes critical insights into the dynamic realm of autophagy research as it pertains to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)¹. Nonetheless, it behooves us to present some constructive concerning the methodologies utilized for information retrieval in their study.

The authors reference the procurement of original data from the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) of the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC), aligning with methodologies documented in prior studies^2,3. However, the appropriateness of the Topic Search (TS) modality for bibliometric analyses has been contested^2,4. TS identifies a publication as relevant when search terms are found within the “Title (TI),” “Abstract (AB),” “Author Keywords (AK),” or “Keywords Plus (KP)” sections. It is imperative to acknowledge that “KP” is generated through WoSCC’s automated algorithms rather than directly by the authors, potentially precipitating the inadvertent aggregation of unrelated works within the search outcomes⁴. Our empirical analysis suggests that a more refined approach, focusing exclusively on “TI,” “AB,” and “AK” for data curation, yields a dataset of greater precision and relevance for bibliometric analysis⁵.

Furthermore, narrowly defined search scope may inadvertently omit pivotal studies, affecting the analysis’s integrity. He et al.’s approach contrasts with more expansive strategies, such as using the incorporation of wildcard characters, such as “*,” which facilitates the inclusion of various terminological derivatives, for example, enabling “Liver Cancer*” to yield results for “Liver Cancer,” “Liver Cancers,” “Liver cancerogenesis,” and related terms. Our recommended search methodology was outlined in Supplementary Table S1 (Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/JS9/C160). This approach, incorporating Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), aims to capture a more comprehensive literature spectrum.

In our meticulously refined search, spanning from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2022, and concluded on 22 February 2024, we unearthed a total of 10 949 records. This initial dataset underwent a rigorous screening process by Y.-D.M. and L.H., who diligently removed duplicates and excluded irrelevant studies. In instances of disagreement, S.-X.L., was summoned to adjudicate and ensure consensus. In all, there are 1798 English-language articles for subsequent analysis, comprising 1495 research articles and 303 review articles, which emanate from 524 distinct journals, authored by 8948 scholars, and have exhibited a robust annual growth rate of 15.6%. A detailed visual representation of these publications is provided in Figure 1A. The body of literature exploring the nexus between autophagy and HCC has been on a significant upward trajectory over the past 10 years, with a pronounced surge in publications observed post-2019, culminating in a zenith of 295 articles in 2022 (Fig. 1B). Among the contributing nations, China has been the most prolific, with a contribution of 1172 articles (Fig. 1C, D). Within this research milieu, Fudan University in China has emerged as a leading institution, contributing 110 articles (Fig. 1E).

Figure 1.

A comprehensive bibliometric analysis of autophagy and hepatocellular carcinoma. (A) This segment presents an overview of autophagy and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) within the WoSCC (Web of Science Core Collection) SCI-EXPANDED (Science Citation Index Expanded), utilizing the ‘Bibiometrix’ package. (B) The trajectory of annual publications over the past 10 years. (C) Corresponding author’s countries. MCP, multiple country publications; SCP, single country publications. (D) A global map illustrating the scientific productivity of various countries in this specific field. (E) A VOSviewer visualization diagram of the networks of cooperation between different institutions and ranking of the top 20 organizations in terms of the number of articles published. (F) A VOSviewer visualization diagram of the networks of cooperation between different institutions and ranking of the top 20 organizations in terms of the number of citations. (G) A VOSviewer visualization diagram of the networks of cooperation between different journals and ranking of the top 20 sources in terms of the number of articles published. (H) The high index of the top 20 sources. (I) A VOSviewer visualization diagram of the networks of cooperation between different authors and ranking of the top 20 authors in terms of the number of articles published. (J) A VOSviewer visualization diagram of the networks of cooperation between different authors and ranking of the top 20 authors in terms of the number of citations. (K) Treemap of the frequency of authors’ keywords within the scope of autophagy and HCC. (L) A VOSviewer visualization diagram of the networks of different keywords. (M) The dynamic process of keywords changes in the research field of autophagy and HCC during 2013–2022. (N) Top 20 most cited references in the field of autophagy and HCC.

In terms of source citation analysis, Sun Yat-sen University leads with 2247 citations (Fig. 1F). ‘Cell Death & Disease’ has been identified as the preeminent journal in this field, publishing 52 articles (Fig. 1G). In the realm of publication impact, ‘Cell Death & Disease’ boasts the highest H-index of 31 (Fig. 1H). Chen, Wei, and Wang, Tao are distinguished as the most prolific authors, each with 11 publications (Fig. 1I). Ding, Wen-Xing leads with 810 citations (Fig. 1J). “Autophagy” as the predominant keyword, appearing 865 times (Fig. 1K, L). Figure 1M illustrates the thematic distribution over different years, while Figure 1N showcases the top 20 most cited references, providing valuable insights into the foundational literature within this domain.

Contrasting with He et al.’s 734 articles, our broader methodology found 1798 articles. This disparity in literature volume serves to highlight how significant differences in publication counts can profoundly influence a variety of bibliometric indicators. These variations emphasize the paramount importance of meticulously formulating a robust search strategy, which constitutes the foundation of any bibliometric analysis aimed at achieving objectivity.

In conclusion, while we recognize the valuable contributions of He et al. to the field, we think that our enhanced search methodology provides a more precise and accurate framework for discerning research trends related to autophagy and HCC spanning the last 10 years. Our findings not only build upon the work of He et al. but also highlight the criticality of adopting a methodologically sound approach in conducting bibliometric studies. This approach ensures a comprehensive and accurate representation of the research landscape, thereby facilitating a deeper understanding of the evolving dynamics within the realm of autophagy and HCC research.

Ethical approval

Not available.

Consent

Not available.

Sources of funding

This work was supported by Shandong Province Medical and Health Science and Technology Development Plan Project (NO. 202203030713). Science and Technology Program of Yantai Affiliated Hospital of Binzhou Medical University (NO. YTFY2022KYQD06).

Author contribution

Y.-D.M: conceptualization, funding acquisition, formal analysis, literature search, methodology, software, and writing – original draft; L.H.: data curation, formal analysis, literature search, methodology, and software; S.-X.L.: supervise, conceptualization, formal analysis, methodology, software, and writing – review and editing. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Conflicts of interest disclosure

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Research registration unique identifying number (UIN)

Not applicable.

Guarantor

Yan-Dong Miao.

Data availability statement

The datasets used during the present study are available from the corresponding authors upon reasonable request.

Provenance and peer review

This paper wasn’t an invited paper.