Page 329 - IJB-9-4

International Journal of Bioprinting 3D printing in bone regeneration and bone repair

Table 4. Top 10 co-cited journals on three-dimensional printing in bone regeneration and bone repair
Rank Cited journal Citations IF
1 Biomaterials 10,890 15.304
2 Acta Biomaterialia 5,933 10.633
3 Materials Science and Engineering C 3,139 8.457
4 Biofabrication 2,762 11.061
5 Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A 2,450 4.854
6 ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 1,814 10.383
7 Tissue Engineering Part A 1,760 4.080
8 Advanced Materials 1,728 32.086
9 Scientific Reports 1,573 4.379
10 Advanced Healthcare Materials 1,543 11.092
Abbreviation: IF, impact factor.

Table 5. Top 10 well-represented research areas related to three-dimensional printing in bone regeneration and bone repair

Rank Research areas Records Percentage (%, N/2,025) Total citations
1 Materials Science 1,171 57.827 34,297
2 Engineering 679 33.531 22,132
3 Chemistry 322 15.901 7,391
4 Science Technology Other Topics 299 14.765 10,186
5 Physics 182 8.988 4,558
6 Cell Biology 162 8.000 3,890
7 Polymer Science 149 7.358 2,087
8 Biochemistry Molecular Biology 121 5.975 2,925
9 Biotechnology Applied Microbiology 119 5.877 3,222
10 Research Experimental Medicine 87 4.296 1,750

by the National Natural Science Foundation of China printed microfibers” (2015), with 433 citations, and “High-
(NSFC), followed by the United States Department of resolution PLA-based composite scaffolds via 3-D printing
Health Human Services (180, 8.889%) and the National technology” (2013), with 295 citations.
Institutes of Health (NIH) USA (179, 8.845%). Among the
top 10 funding sources, half came from China, while the The co-cited references were visualized by CiteSpace
remaining came from the USA and the European Union. (Figure 6B). Table 9 shows the top 5 references with the
highest number of citations, which were published by the
3.5. Citation and co-citation analysis corresponding authors Kaplan D (2005; 276 citations),
A total of 601 documents in this field with more than 25 Atala A (2014; 241 citations), Ma PX (2013; 212 citations),
citations were analyzed by VOSviewer (Figure 6A). The top Hollister SJ (2005;144 citations), and Hutmacher DW
five most cited review or research publications are shown (2000; 139 citations). Subsequently, the co-cited references
in Table 8. There were 957 citations for “Recent advances were clustered based on indexing terms (Figure 6C),
in 3D printing of biomaterials” (2015), followed by “Bone forming 18 major clusters: “bone regeneration,”
regenerative medicine: classic options, novel strategies, “macrophage polarization,” “osteogenic peptide,”
and future directions” (2014), with 596 citations, and “hybrid constructs,” “bioink,” “3D printing,” “dental
“Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Engineering: State of the art and tissue regeneration,” “cranial defects,” “osteoinduction,”
new perspectives” (2017), with 588 citations. However, the “bone scaffolds,” “computer-aided tissue design,” “tibial
top 5 research publications were as follows: “3D printing tuberosity advancement,” “periodontal regeneration,”
of composite calcium phosphate and collagen scaffolds for “osteointegration,” “indirect solid free form fabrication,”
bone regeneration” (2014), with 522 citations, followed by “in vivo biomaterials,” “microporous materials,” and
“Reinforcement of hydrogels using three-dimensionally “nanomaterials.”

Volume 9 Issue 4 (2023) 321 https://doi.org/10.18063/ijb.737