Mapping research themes and collaborative networks in schizophrenia genetics and clinical psychological correlates: A...

This study presents a bibliometric and scientometric analysis of research trends in schizophrenia genetics over nearly 7 decades (1957-2025). The field has evolved from early heritability studies to genome-wide association studies and multi-omics approaches. The objective was to map the historical trajectory, thematic evolution, key contributors, and global collaboration patterns in relation to clinically relevant psychological constructs.

An integrated bibliometric and scientometric approach was applied. A total of 5679 publications were included after systematic retrieval and PRISMA-guided screening from Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science (initial n = 6193; final n = 5679). Data preprocessing included deduplication, keyword normalization, and metadata verification. VOSviewer (version 1.6.20) was used to construct co-authorship, keyword co-occurrence, and source co-citation networks. Thresholds were defined empirically to balance network interpretability and coverage.

The findings suggest a gradual increase in research activity beginning in the 1990s, followed by a marked acceleration after 2010. Four thematic clusters were identified: neurobiological mechanisms and endophenotypes; basic genetic foundations; pharmacological treatments; and clinical comorbidities. Temporal patterns indicate a shift between 2012 and 2016 from genetic association studies toward functional genomics and cognitive neuroscience. Prominent contributors include J. van Os, R.E. Gur, and M.T. Tsuang. The United States may play a prominent role within the global collaboration network. However, clinically relevant psychological constructs may be less centrally integrated within the network structure.

This study provides a structured bibliometric mapping of schizophrenia genetics research from 1957 to 2025. The findings may suggest increasing movement toward large-scale, consortium-based research models and a possible partial separation between clinical and basic science domains. Importantly, the results highlight a relative underrepresentation of clinically interpretable psychological dimensions. These findings may indicate the need for stronger integration between genetic discoveries and clinical psychological frameworks to enhance translational relevance.