Search

With the massive use of lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles and energy storage, the environmental and resource problems faced by used lithium-ion batteries are becoming more and more prominent. In order to better resource utilization and environmental protection, this paper employs bibliometric and data analysis methods to explore publications related to waste lithium-ion battery recycling from 1984 to 2021. The Web of Science core set from the SCIE online database was used for this article. These findings demonstrate a considerable increase trend in the number of publications published in the subject of recycling used lithium-ion batteries, with a natural-sciences-centric focus. Argonne National Lab, Chinese Academy of Sciences, and China Academic and Scientific Research Center are the top three institutions in terms of quantity of papers published. The affiliated journals corresponding to these three institutions also have high impact factors, which are 106.47, 44.85, and 58.69, respectively. In comparison to comparable institutes in other nations, the American Argonne National Laboratory supports 223 research articles in this area. China and the US make up the majority of the research's funding. The two key aspects of current lithium-ion battery recycling research are material structure research and environmentally friendly recycling. Nevertheless, high-capacity lithium-ion batteries, waste lithium-ion integrated structures, and gentle recycling of spent lithium-ion batteries will be the major aspects of study in the future. It is hoped that the above analysis can bring new ideas and methods to the field of waste lithium-ion battery recycling and provide a basis for the subsequent research and application of waste lithium-ion battery recycling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

miRNAs biomarkers are emerging as an essential part of clinical oncology. Their oncogenic and tumour suppressor properties playing a role in malignancy has generated interest in their potential for use in disease prognosis. While several studies on miRNA have been carried out across the globe, evaluating the clinical implications of miRNAs in cancer diagnosis and prognosis research has currently not been attempted. A study delineating the area of miRNA research, including the topics presently being focused on, the seminal papers in this field, and the direction of research interest, does not exist. This study aims to conduct a large-scale, global data analysis and bibliometric profiling analysis of studies to evaluate the research output of clinical implications of miRNAs in cancer diagnosis and prognosis listed in the SCOPUS database. A systematic search strategy was followed to identify and extract all relevant studies, subsequently analysed to generate a bibliometric map. SPSS software (version 27) was used to calculate bibliometric indicators or parameters for analysis, such as year and country of affiliation with leading authors, journals, and institutions. It is also used to analyse annual research outputs, including total citations and the number of times it has been cited with productive nations and H-index. The number of global research articles retrieved for miRNA-Cancer research over the study period 2003 to 2019 was 18,636. Between 2012 and 2019, the growth rate of global publications is six times (n = 15,959; 90.71 percent articles) that of 2003 to 2011. (2704; 9.29 per cent articles). China published the most publications in the field of miRNA in cancer (n = 7782; 41%), while the United States had the most citations (n = 327,538; 48%) during the time span. Of these journals, Oncotarget has the highest percentage of article publications. The journal Cancer Research had the most citations (n = 41,876), with 6.20 per cent (n = 41,876). This study revealed a wide variety of journals in which miRNA-Cancer research are published; these bibliometric parameters exhibit crucial clinical information on performance assessment of research productivity and quality of research output. Therefore, this study provides a helpful reference for clinical oncologists, cancer scientists, policy decision-makers and clinical data researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]