[Analysis of the development trend of burn discipline from the literature published in in 22 years].

To analyze the literature published in (now ) in the last 22 years, and to explore the development trend of burn discipline. The relevant clinical and research literature published in from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2021 were retrieved through database. Bibliometrics was used to classify and analyze the literature by research types, involved research fields, and reported causes of injury, and compare them every 3 years according to the year of publication (with literature published in 2021 being included in the last time period). Keywords of all the literature were retrieved, which were corrected and conversed later. CiteSpace 6.1.R2 software was used to visually cluster the included keywords, count high-frequency and high-centrality keywords, and divide the high-frequency keywords by time as before for segment comparison. A total of 4 485 relevant papers were included, with an average of about 204 papers each year. The research types analysis of literature showed that clinical diagnosis and treatment literature had the highest proportion, reaching 65.3% (2 929/4 485), followed by cell experiment and animal experiment literature, accounting for 18.1% (812/4 485) and 13.2% (591/4 485), respectively. The proportion of various research types of the literature in each time period was basically stable. The analysis of the research fields involved in the literature showed that the literature in the field of systemic treatment of burns accounted for the highest proportion, reaching 60.2% (2 699/4 485), followed by the literature in the fields of acute wounds and plastic surgery, accounting for 20.2% (908/4 485) and 7.3% (326/4 485), respectively. The proportion of the literature in the field of systemic treatment of burns decreased from 84.0% (430/512) in 2000-2002 to 40.3% (373/926) in 2018-2021, with a decreasing proportion of 43.7%. While compared with that in 2000-2002, the proportions of literature in the fields of acute wounds, plastic surgery, chronic wounds, and burn rehabilitation were on the rise, with the proportions in 2018-2021 increased by 11.7%, 9.1%, 10.7%, and 5.5%, respectively. In the first 6 time periods, the number of literature in the field of discipline management was few and remained in single digits, but it increased to 49 in 2018-2021. Among the 1 099 literature in the field of systemic treatment of burns with a clear cause of injury, the literature on thermal burns was the most, accounting for 58.5% (643/1 099), followed by the literature on electrical burns and chemical burns, accounting for 19.8% (218/1 099) and 12.6% (138/1 099), respectively. The comparison by time period showed that the proportion of literature reporting thermal burns showed a significant downward trend, while the proportion of literature reporting other causes of injury did not change significantly. A total of 6 822 keywords from 2 236 literature were included for analysis. Visual cluster analysis showed that relevant studies focused on burns, surgical flaps, scars, and wound healing. The top 3 keywords in frequency were burns, wound healing, and surgical flaps, and the top 3 keywords in centrality were burns, scars, and skin transplantation. The comparison by time period showed that the only keyword with a stable frequency in the top 10 ranks was burns; with the passage of time, some keywords such as endotoxin/endotoxins and fibroblasts gradually dropped out of the top 10 ranks, while keywords such as wounds and injuries, surgical flaps, and negative-pressure wound therapy gradually entered the top 10 ranks. Among the literature published in during the last 22 years, the literature on systemic treatment of burns and thermal burns has gradually decreased, while the literature on chronic wounds and burn rehabilitation has increased. Surgical flaps, wound healing, and scar prevention and treatment are the current research hot spots in burn discipline.