Bibliometric analysis identifies trends and emerging hotspots in Salvia miltiorrhiza research, suggesting areas for future studies.
Background: Salvia miltiorrhiza (Danshen) has shown significant therapeutic potential in cardiovascular and neurological disorders, highlighting its clinical importance. With the growing global attention on Danshen, a comprehensive bibliometric evaluation is needed to clarify the current research landscape and promote its international development. This study analyzed collaboration networks, research status, and emerging trends in Danshen-related studies. Methods: Publications on Danshen from 2006 to 2025 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. Original research articles were analyzed using CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and Bibliometrix to evaluate coauthorship networks, journal distribution, keyword co-occurrence, citation bursts, and co-citation patterns, thereby identifying leading contributors, emerging hotspots, and the intellectual foundations of the field. Results: Four thousand one hundred sixty-nine articles were retrieved, steadily increasing from 2006 to 2024. China dominated output (3706 publications), followed by the United States and South Korea, with China–United States and China–South Korea collaborations being most prominent. The Chinese Academy of Sciences was the most productive institution, and Liang Zongsuo was the leading individual contributor (70 papers). The Journal of Ethnopharmacology served as the leading publication platform. Research hotspots focused on the biosynthesis of tanshinones and phenolic acids and molecular mechanisms such as AKT and Nrf2 signaling, with emerging trends in network pharmacology and molecular docking. Conclusion: This study provides a comprehensive knowledge map of Danshen research, illustrating global collaboration, research development, and emerging directions. While offering a reference for future studies, the findings also highlight the lack of high-quality clinical evidence, indicating the need for translational and multicenter clinical research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: