Interpretation of the reporting guideline for Bibliometric Reviews of the Biomedical Literature (BIBLIO)

Published on Oct. 28, 2026Total Views: 37 times Total Downloads: 8 times Download Mobile

Author: LI Jiali ¹ GUO Ziyan ² LIU Fan ¹ GUO Wenyan ³ KE Lixin ⁴  ZHAO Xinke ¹  LU Cuncun ⁵

Affiliation: 1.School of Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Gansu University of Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou 730101, China 2.School of Clinical Chinese Medicine, Gansu University of Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou 730101, China 3.The First School of Clinical Medicine, Gansu University of Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou 730101, China 4.Department of Pediatrics, University of Groningen, Groningen 9713GZ, Netherlands 5.School of Nursing, North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong 637000, Sichuan Province, China

Keywords: BIBLIO Biomedicine Bibliometrics Scientometrics Reporting guideline Knowledge mapping

DOI: 10.12173/j.issn.1004-4337.202605042

Reference: Li JL, Guo ZY, Liu F, et al. Interpretation of the reporting guideline for Bibliometric Reviews of the Biomedical Literature (BIBLIO)[J]. Journal of Mathematical Medicine, 2026, 39(10): 707-714. DOI: 10.12173/j.issn.1004-4337.202605042.[Article in Chinese]  Copied

Abstract
Full-text
References

Abstract

In recent years, bibliometric research in the biomedical field has grown exponentially. To enhance the scientific rigor, accuracy, and transparency of such research, an international team of scholars published a preliminary reporting guideline for Bibliometric Reviews of the Biomedical Literature (BIBLIO) in Systematic Reviews in 2023. Aiming to assist Chinese researchers in understanding and applying this guideline, this article outlines its development and offers a detailed, example-driven interpretation of the BIBLIO checklist items.

Full-text

Please download the PDF version to read the full text: download

References

1. LiuL, JonesBF, UzziB, et al. Data, measurement and empirical methods in the science of science[J]. Nat Hum Behav, 2023, 7(7): 1046-1058. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-023-01562-4.

2. 李杰, 刘芊芊, 张子恒. 科学计量学的全球态势观察[J]. 科学观察, 2025, 20(3): 43-61.LiJ, LiuQQ, ZhangZH. Scientific landscape of global scientometrics research[J]. Science Focus, 2025, 20(3): 43-61. DOI: 10.15978/j.cnki.1673-5668.20240915.

3. 魏蕾, 范鹿, 刘学政, 等. 基于文献计量学的我国全科医学人才培养研究热点可视化分析[J]. 中华全科医师杂志, 2025, 24(11): 1378-1386.WeiL, FanL, LiuXZ, et al. Visualizing research hotspots in general practitioner training in China: a bibliometric analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of General Practitioners, 2025, 24(11): 1378-1386. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn114798-20250228-00163.

4. DonthuN, KumarS, MukherjeeD, et al. How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: an overview and guidelines[J]. J Bus Res, 2021, 133: 285-296. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070.

5. LiJ, GoerlandtF, ReniersG. An overview of scientometric mapping for the safety science community: methods, tools, and framework[J]. Safety Sci, 2021, 134: 105093. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2020.105093.

6. LiuH, ShahAQ, TariqH, et al. Characteristics of bibliometric analyses of the complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine literature: a scoping review[J]. J Integr Complement Med, 2026, 32(5): 407-419. DOI: 10.1177/27683605251407817.

7. KokolP, Blažun VošnerH, ZavršnikJ. Application of bibliometrics in medicine: a historical bibliometrics analysis[J]. Health Info Libr J, 2021, 38(2): 125-138. DOI: 10.1111/hir.12295.

8. KooM, LinSC. An analysis of reporting practices in the top 100 cited health and medicine-related bibliometric studies from 2019 to 2021 based on a proposed guidelines[J]. Heliyon, 2023, 9(6): e16780. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon. 2023.e16780.

9. 田甜, 张飞, 张璇, 等. 2013—2023年国内外全科医生培养的文献计量学研究[J]. 中国全科医学, 2026, 29(1): 50-57.TianT, ZhangF, ZhangX, et al. Bibliometrics on general practitioner training domestically and internationally from 2013 to 2023[J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(1): 50-57. DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2024.0282.

10. Catalá-LópezF, Alonso-ArroyoA, PageMJ, et al. A cross-sectional analysis identified co-authorship networks and scientific collaboration on reporting guidelines for health research[J]. J Clin Epidemiol, 2023, 157: 22-34. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.02.001.

11. HansfordHJ, RichardsGC, PageMJ, et al. Reporting health and medical research[J]. BMJ Evid Based Med, 2024, 29(6): 358-362. DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112563.

12. NgJY, LiuH, MasoodM, et al. Guidance for the reporting of bibliometric analyses: a scoping review[J]. Quant Sci Stud, 2025, 6: 988-1001. DOI: 10.1162/QSS.a.12.

13. FeiX, HuY. A call for the establishment of bibliometric reporting guidelines[J]. J Clin Nurs, 2025, 34(8): 3425-3426. DOI: 10.1111/jocn.17574.

14. HoangAD. Evaluating bibliometrics reviews: a practical guide for peer review and critical reading[J]. Eval Rev, 2025, 49(6): 1074-1102. DOI: 10.1177/0193841X251336839.

15. MontazeriA, MohammadiS, Hesari PM, et al. Preliminary guideline for reporting bibliometric reviews of the biomedical literature (BIBLIO): a minimum requirements[J]. Syst Rev, 2023, 12(1): 239. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-023-02410-2.

16. ShiX, YinH, ShiX. Bibliometric analysis of literature on natural medicines against chronic kidney disease from 2001 to 2024[J]. Phytomedicine, 2025, 138: 156410. DOI: 10.1016/j.phymed.2025.156410.

17. 郑昊然, 毛信心, 宋庆桥, 等. 心肾代谢综合征的前沿和热点演变:一项文献计量分析[J]. 中华心力衰竭和心肌病杂志, 2024, 8(1): 16-29.ZhengHR, MaoXX, SongQQ, et al. Frontier and hotspot evolution in cardiorenal metabolic syndrome: a bibliometric analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Heart Failure and Cardiomyopathy, 2024, 8(1): 16-29. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn101460-20231018-00029.

18. Omaña-GuzmánI, Rosas-DiazM, Martínez-LópezYE, et al. Strategic interventions in clinical randomized trials for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) and obesity in the pediatric population: a systematic review with meta-analysis and bibliometric analysis[J]. BMC Med, 2024, 22(1): 548. DOI: 10.1186/s12916-024-03744-x.

19. NgJY, StephenD, LiuJ, et al. Bibliometrics and altmetrics in the context of traditional, complementary, and integrative medicine[J]. Integr Med Res, 2025, 14(3): 101181. DOI: 10.1016/j.imr.2025.101181.

20. ÖztürkO, KocamanR, KanbachDK. How to design bibliometric research: an overview and a framework proposal[J]. Rev Manag Sci, 2024, 18(11): 3333-3361. DOI: 10.1007/s11846-024-00738-0.

21. 李志强, 刘建平, 王雪峰. 文献计量研究报告指南与清单的制定与展望[J]. 中国医学前沿杂志(电子版), 2024, 16(10): 92-93.LiZQ, LiuJP, WangXF. Development and prospect of reporting guidelines and checklists for bibliometric studies[J]. Chinese Journal of the Frontiers of Medical Science (Electronic Version), 2024, 16(10): 92-93. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-7372.2024.10.101.

22. CaputoA, KarginaM. A user-friendly method to merge Scopus and Web of Science data during bibliometric analysis[J]. J Mark Anal, 2022, 10(1): 82-88. DOI: 10.1057/s41270-021-00142-7.

23. NikolićD, IvanovićD, IvanovićL. An open-source tool for merging data from multiple citation databases[J]. Scientometrics, 2024, 129(7): 4573-4595. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-024-05076-2.

24. NiZ, PengML, BalakrishnanV, et al. Implementation of chatbot technology in health care: protocol for a bibliometric analysis[J]. JMIR Res Protoc, 2024, 13: e54349. DOI: 10.2196/54349.

25. LuoX, LiZ, YangZ, et al. Using large language models to assess the consistency of randomized controlled trials on AI interventions with CONSORT-AI: cross-sectional survey[J]. J Med Internet Res, 2025, 27: e72412. DOI: 10.2196/72412.

26. 张亚玲, 张强, 邓秀秀, 等. 预后因素研究系统评价/Meta分析的方法学质量评价工具(AMSTAR-PF)解读[J]. 医学新知, 2026, 36(9): 963-970.ZhangYL, ZhangQ, DengXX, et al. Interpretation of a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews/Meta-analyses of prognostic factor studies (AMSTAR-PF)[J]. New Medicine, 2026, 36(9): 963-970. DOI: 10.12173/j.issn.1004-5511.202604065.