S878 Global and Temporal Trends in Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) Research: A Bibliometric Analysis of Geographic Disparities

Introduction: Despite the growing clinical recognition of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), disparities in the global dissemination of research on this condition remain insufficiently explored. As bibliometric patterns often reflect deeper inequalities in research infrastructure, funding, and opportunity, understanding such disparities in EoE publications may provide insight into global access to knowledge generation and therapeutic advances. This study aimed to evaluate global publication trends to the 1,000 most cited articles related to EoE. Methods: A bibliometric analysis was conducted using the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC). The 1,000 most cited studies on EoE published between 1978 and 2024 were included for evaluation. Meeting abstracts were excluded. Bibliometric indicators were calculated using the Bibliometrix package in R. Parameters assessed included publication trends, citation metrics, and geographic distribution. Results: A total of 1,000 EoE-related publications from 165 sources were identified. The annual growth rate was 3.56%, and the average article age was 11.3 years. Each document received an average of 84.78 citations, reflecting strong academic impact. The most prolific journals were Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (N = 97), Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology (N = 81), and Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition (N = 69). The U.S. led in corresponding authorship (655 articles, 65.5%), followed by Spain (7.6%), and Switzerland (6.0%). International collaborations were relatively limited, with the U.S. having only 12.7% multi-country publications. Among the top 5 most globally cited articles, 3 originated from the U.S., with the most cited article with 1,581 citations. All the top 10 countries contributing to EoE research are from developed nations. Only 2.7% of global EoE publications across the top 100 cited articles originated from developing countries. Also, among the top 100 most cited, less than 25% had a woman as first author. Conclusion: Our findings reveal notable disparities in global EoE research output, with a dominant contribution from the U.S. and underrepresentation from low- and middle-income countries. These disparities may reflect broader imbalances in research opportunity and access to scientific infrastructure. Enhanced collaboration and targeted capacity-building efforts are needed to promote more equitable global representation in EoE research.