Bibliometric trends in IBS and gut microbiome research: cross-database analysis
Scientific output on IBS and the gut microbiome grew from fewer than 10 articles per year before 2010 to 162 in 2025, with three distinct thematic phases identified across 25 years.
| Population | — |
|---|---|
| Intervention | — |
| Comparator | — |
| Outcome | — |
What the study showed
A cross-database bibliometric analysis of WoSCC, Scopus, and PubMed identified a consistent acceleration in the literature after 2014. Currently active keyword bursts center on visceral hyperalgesia, HPA axis dysregulation, and short-chain fatty acid mechanisms. The US and China lead by publication volume.
How it was done
Parallel bibliometric analysis across three databases (WoSCC n=1,502, Scopus n=1,163, PubMed n=975), covering English-language articles and reviews from January 2000 to December 2025, visualized using VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and bibliometrix.
Risk of bias
Bibliometrics maps the structure of the literature but cannot validate causality or clinical efficacy. Restriction to English-language publications introduces language bias, and the abstract provides no detailed inclusion/exclusion criteria beyond language and timeframe.
What this study does NOT prove
Does not prove that microbiome-targeted interventions are effective in treating IBS.
In clinical practice
This study generates no direct clinical recommendations. It functions solely as a research landscape map to guide investigative priorities.
Limitations
Bibliometrics maps the structure of the literature but cannot validate causality or clinical efficacy. Restriction to English-language publications introduces language bias, and the abstract provides no detailed inclusion/exclusion criteria beyond language and timeframe.
Technical appendix
Version history
- 1.0 · 2026-08-07 — Auto-generated under Evidence Standard v1.0
Paid access: structured summary from public metadata; consult the original study at the source.