Research on the author collaboration network and institutional influence in the transcatheter aortic valve replacement field based on CiteSpace: analysis of the top one hundred highly cited articles

Figures

• 

  Fig. 1. Author Cooperation Network Analysis. Node size represents the total citation count of each author’s publications within the dataset (larger nodes = more highly cited authors). Node color gradient from blue to red indicates the publication year of the author’s core works (blue = earlier, red = more recent). Lines between nodes represent co-authorship relationships, with thicker lines indicating stronger/frequent collaboration. Only labels of the most influential authors (e.g., Leon MB, Makkar RR) are displayed for clarity; smaller nodes represent contributing authors in the collaborative network

• 

  Fig. 2. Country Cooperation Network Analysis. Node size corresponds to the number of publications originating from each country (larger nodes = higher publication volume). Node color gradient from blue to red denotes the year of the country’s first high-cited TAVR publication in the dataset (blue = earlier entry into the field). Lines between countries indicate international co-authorship, with thicker lines representing more frequent cross-border collaboration. The United Kingdom (UK) is labeled to reflect collaborative research across England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland

• 

  Fig. 3. Institutional Cooperation Network Analysis. Node size represents the number of publications contributed by each institution (larger nodes = higher publication output). Node color gradient from blue to red indicates the year of the institution’s first high-cited TAVR publication (blue = earlier research initiation). Lines between institutions denote collaborative relationships, with thicker lines suggesting stronger/frequent co-authorship. Major research hubs (Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Columbia University, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center) are highlighted as core nodes in the TAVR research collaboration network

• 

  Fig. 4. Timeline of Landmark TAVR Studies (2007–2019). Timeline visualization of practice-changing landmark TAVR studies (defined as RCTs, registries, or guidelines endorsed in major cardiovascular guidelines and with citation counts exceeding the 95th percentile of pre-2010 TAVR publications). Key trials/guidelines are plotted by author and publication year, with the citation burst metric (S = 0.8983) overlaid to illustrate sustained scientific impact and research momentum. Nodes are sized by total citation count of the landmark study; color gradient from blue to red represents the peak citation burst period (blue = earlier burst, red = later burst)

• 

  Fig. 5. Clustered Reference Co-Citation Network Analysis (2010–2021). CiteSpace-based bibliometric map of the 100 most-cited TAVR articles, with modularity Q = 0.82 and mean silhouette score = 0.87 (indicating robust, well-separated clustering). Node size corresponds to total citation frequency of the referenced publication (larger nodes = more highly cited). Node color gradient from blue to red represents the publication year (blue = 2010, red = 2021); ring width around nodes denotes betweenness centrality (wider rings = greater structural influence as a network bridge). Edge width indicates co-citation strength (wider edges = more frequent joint citation); distance between nodes is the inverse of co-citation strength (closer nodes = more frequently co-cited). Red-highlighted burst terms (#0 aortic valve, #1 five-year outcome, #2 ACC guideline, etc.) label thematic clusters ranked by cluster size; #0 designates the primary cluster focused on aortic valve disease pathophysiology and clinical management as the foundation for TAVR research

• 

  Fig. 6. The keyword timeline diagram. CiteSpace keyword co-occurrence overlay of the 100 most-cited TAVR articles (2010–2021; UN = 10, LBY = 5, e = 1.0). Node size indicates frequency; burst terms (#0–#7) highlight evolving research priorities from “stenosis” and “transcatheter aortic valve implantation” to late complications such as “pacemaker need,” “infective endocarditis,” and “antithrombotic” strategies. Color gradient shows temporal progression, with red indicating peak activity in 2018–2019

• 

  Fig. 7. Reference Citation Burst Analysis (2010–2024). Top 25 references with the strongest citation bursts in TAVR research (2010–2024). Horizontal bars indicate burst duration (x-axis = years); bar color gradient from blue to red represents burst strength (red = higher strength). Peak burst strength values are labeled for key references (e.g., Adams DH 2014 = 7.78, Leon MB 2016 = 7.79), identifying pivotal trials and guidelines that redirected clinical practice—from early procedural feasibility (2010–2014) to TAVR indications in low-risk patients (2015–2024). Nodes at the base of bars are sized by the total citation count of the reference; edge lines link consecutive high-impact references to illustrate the evolutionary trajectory of TAVR clinical evidence

• 

  Fig. 8. Sankey Diagram of TAVR Research Networks (2010–2021). Sankey diagram illustrating the tripartite relationship between leading TAVR research institutions, core journals, and key research keywords/subject terms. Node size corresponds to publication volume (larger nodes = more publications associated with the institution/journal/keyword). Line width denotes the strength of the association (wider lines = more publications linking the paired institution-journal, journal-keyword, or institution-keyword). Nodes are color-coded by category: teal = research institutions (e.g., Mayo Clinic, Columbia University, DZHK Berlin), navy = core journals (e.g., NEJM, JACC: CV Interventions, Circulation, European Heart Journal), orange = key research keywords (e.g., high-risk patients, TAVR, aortic stenosis, implantation). The diagram visualizes the core knowledge dissemination network and thematic focus of highly-cited TAVR research