Global trends in bioterrorism and biosecurity research publications (1997–2025): A Scopus bibliometric analysis

Introduction: Bioterrorism and biosecurity preparedness are critical pillars of global public health protection and resilience of health systems worldwide. Although this field has grown over the past few decades, there remains limited clarity on how research efforts have evolved and where critical gaps persist, particularly regarding global collaboration and emerging biological threats. To address this, we conducted a bibliometric analysis to map publication trends, influential contributors, and collaboration networks in bioterrorism and biosecurity from 1997 to 2025. This study analyzed global research output, collaboration, and thematic evolution in bioterrorism and biosecurity and identified gaps relevant to preparedness and policy. Methods: We searched the Scopus database for peer-reviewed articles, reviews, and conference papers in English using the terms “bioterrorism” OR “biological terrorism” OR “biological warfare” AND “biosecurity” OR “biosafety” OR “biodefense. Extracted data were analyzed for publication trends, that is, annual, country, author, and institutional outputs. Citation analysis, keyword co‑occurrence, international co‑authorship, and collaboration were analyzed using VOSviewer (v1.6.20). Results: A total of 1,222 records were included. The United States led the output (n=570), followed by the United Kingdom (n=66). The highest number of annual publications occurred in 2004 (n=112). The leading institutions included the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (n=30) and the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (n=29). Medicine, social sciences, and biochemistry/genetics/molecular biology were the dominant disciplines. Keyword networks clustered around “biological warfare,” “humans,” and “bioterrorism.” Arnon’s 2001 paper received the most citations (n=1,485). Conclusions: Publication trends in biosafety and biosecurity are highly event-driven, as shown in this analysis, and are concentrated in high-income countries. Fewer publications are produced in low- and middle-income countries, such as in Africa. These findings underscore the need for sustained collaboration, equitable partnerships, and structured support for low- and middle-income countries.