Productivity, Impact, and Collaboration Patterns in Indian Nanocellulose Research for Biomedical Applications: A Bibliometric Perspective

INTRODUCTION

Nanocellulose has become an extremely beneficial and enduring nanomaterial that entrepreneurs as well as scientists are very interested in because of its unique physical and chemical traits. Nanocellulose comes from natural resources that are easy to find, like wood pulp or agricultural waste, or it can be made by bacteria. There are three main types of nanocellulose: Cellulose Nanocrystals (CNCs), cellulose nanofibers (CNFs), and bacterial nanocellulose (BNC) (Klemm et al., 2011; Moon et al., 2011; Pradeep et al., 2025). These materials have nanoscale dimensions, a large surface area, great mechanical strength, adjustable surface chemistry, and great biocompatibility. Nanocellulose is especially useful in medicine because it is naturally biocompatible, biodegradable, and not very toxic (Lin & Dufresne, 2014). Recent years have seen a rapid increase in research on nanocellulose, especially in areas like drug delivery, wound healing, tissue engineering, biosensing, and antimicrobial coatings (Abitbol et al., 2016; Jorfi & Foster, 2015). It can make hydrogels, films, scaffolds, and nanocomposites, which has opened up new ways to make advanced biomedical materials that work better and have more features (Dufresne, 2013).

Due to the interdisciplinary character and rapidly expanding literature in this domain, a systematic bibliometric analysis is crucial for delineating the scientific landscape, recognizing research trends, and comprehending collaborative dynamics. This methodology can yield significant insights into the progression of research, key contributors, impactful publications, and nascent fields at the intersection of nanocellulose and biomedical applications (Kappi et al., 2021; Madhu et al., 2025). This study seeks to deliver a thorough bibliometric assessment of the worldwide research output concerning nanocellulose in biomedical applications, utilizing data from the Scopus database. The analysis aims to identify significant contributors, collaborative networks, thematic clusters, and research hotspots, providing a structured overview to inform subsequent inquiries in this evolving domain.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Biomedical research using nanocellulose has grown tremendously because it is biocompatible, sustainable, and can be used in many different ways. Bibliometric studies have been essential in delineating its research evolution, emphasizing principal contributors, trends, and thematic advancements. Kappi et al., (2022) performed a comparative bibliometric analysis of nanocellulose research output from India and the global context. Their results showed that publications with more than one author had a bigger impact on research, with 11,700 citations. “Carbohydrate Polymers (UK)” was the most popular journal, publishing 253 articles and having an h-index of 28. Jacinto & Spinacé, (2019) performed a bibliometric analysis of Brazilian research on nanocellulose utilizing Web of Science data, revealing 69 active research groups. Bacterial cellulose became the main source, acid hydrolysis became the most common method, and scanning electron microscopy became the most common way to measure size. “CNPq, CAPES, and FAPESP” were some of the most important funding agencies. Ngasotter et al., (2025) examined global research trends in nanochitin, noting exponential publication growth since 1992, with China and Japan as primary contributors, and emphasizing new applications in food packaging and Pickering emulsions. Zhang et al., (2025) performed a bibliometric analysis of cellulose-based nanomaterials, revealing a significant increase in publications after 2015, especially in the fields of wound healing and drug delivery. Ho et al., (2022) used citation analysis to follow the growth of bacterial nanocellulose research. They found that it grew steadily from 2005 to 2010 and then quickly from 2015 to 2020. Chang et al., (2023) investigated bibliometric trends in nanodrug delivery systems for colorectal cancer, highlighting “colitis” and “exosomes” as pivotal themes in recent developments. Together, these studies make a strong but changing base. This bibliometric study builds on previous work by mapping the intellectual landscape, finding key contributors, and outlining the main themes in nanocellulose and biomedical research India.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

• To examine the growth trajectory and temporal distribution of Indian research on Nanocellulose for biomedical applications during the period 2010–2025.
• To analyse publication patterns by document type, identifying their respective contributions to research productivity and citation impact.
• To evaluate authorship patterns and collaborative behaviour using bibliometric indicators such as degree of collaboration and collaboration coefficient.
• To identify the most productive and influential authors, and institutions, based on publication output and citation performance.
• To map research themes and knowledge structure through keyword co-occurrence and thematic clustering analysis.
• To examine the extent and nature of national and international collaboration countries in Indian nanocellulose-based biomedical research.
• To highlight emerging trends and research gaps, providing directions for future research and policy-level interventions.

METHODOLOGY

The present study employs a quantitative bibliometric approach to examine Indian research trends in nanocellulose for biomedical applications. Bibliographic data were retrieved from the Scopus database, chosen for its comprehensive coverage of peer-reviewed literature and citation indexing. A systematic search was conducted using relevant keywords and Boolean operators applied to the title, abstract, and keywords, with the following search string:

((TITLE-ABS-KEY(“nanocellulose” OR “nano cellulose” OR “cellulose nanocrystals” OR “CNCs” OR “cellulose nanofibers” OR “CNFs” OR “bacterial nanocellulose” OR “nanostructured cellulose” OR “nanofibrillated cellulose” OR “biocellulose”) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY(“biomedical applications” OR “drug delivery” OR “tissue engineering” OR “wound healing” OR “biosensors” OR “scaffold” OR “regenerative medicine” OR “bioimaging” OR “medical devices” OR “therapeutic applications” OR “biocompatibility” OR “biomaterials” OR “nanomedicine”)) AND ( EXCLUDE ( PUBYEAR,2026) ) AND ( LIMIT-TO ( LANGUAGE,”English” ) ) AND ( LIMIT-TO ( AFFILCOUNTRY,”India” ) ) ).

A total of 692 records were downloaded and screened to remove duplicates and irrelevant documents. The cleaned dataset was organized in Microsoft Excel for tabulation and computation of key bibliometric indicators, including Total Publications (TP), Total Citations (TC), Citations Per Paper (CPP), Relative Citation Index (RCI). VOSviewer was used for visualization and network analyses, including co-authorship and country collaborations, and keyword co-occurrence.

Annual Productivity

Table 1 illustrates the year-wise publication productivity of India in nanocellulose research for biomedical applications during 2010–2025, comprising 692 publications that collectively received 23,812 citations, with an overall CPP of 34.41. The formative phase (2010–2013) contributed only 14 publications (2.01%), yet recorded disproportionately high citation impact (CPP ranging from 47.29 to 619.00), indicating influential early Indian studies. The intermediate growth phase (2014–2017) produced 58 publications (8.39%) with consistently high CPP values (75.11–109.50), reflecting consolidation of research quality. A pronounced expansion is evident from 2018 onwards, with 620 publications (89.60%) published during 2018–2025, of which 575 publications (83.09%) appeared between 2020 and 2025 alone. The peak output occurred in 2025 (149 publications; 21.53%), followed by 2024 (119 publications; 17.20%) and 2022 (101 publications; 14.60%). Although the CPP declined sharply from 156.00 in 2018 to 2.13 in 2025, this trend largely reflects citation latency and rapid growth in publication volume. Overall, the statistical pattern indicates a clear shift in Indian research from a low-volume, high-impact exploratory stage to a high-volume, maturing research phase in nanocellulose-based biomedical applications.

Document Classification

Table 2 shows the document-wise distribution of Indian publications on nanocellulose in biomedical applications, totaling 692 records with 23,812 citations. Journal articles dominate the output (319; 46.10%) and account for 10,121 citations, reflecting their primary role in reporting original research. Review articles, comprising 173 publications (25.00%), received the highest citation count (12,655 citations), indicating their strong scholarly influence in consolidating and guiding research in this field. Book chapters represent 23.84% of the output but attracted relatively fewer citations, while other document types such as conference papers, books, and editorials contribute marginally. Overall, the distribution highlights the prominence of articles in productivity and the exceptional citation impact of review literature in Indian nanocellulose-based biomedical research.

Authorship Pattern

Table 3 illustrates the authorship pattern of Indian publications on nanocellulose in biomedical applications, based on 692 publications that received 23,812 citations, and clearly indicates the predominance of collaborative research. Single-authored papers are very limited (20; 2.89%; 842 citations), whereas a substantial share of the output is concentrated in three-author (128; 18.50%), four-author (106; 15.32%), and two-author (105; 15.17%) contributions. Papers authored by five to eight researchers account for 250 publications (36.12%), with particularly high citation impact observed for eight-authored papers (3,582 citations). The presence of Mega-Authored Papers (10; 1.45%) further reflects instances of extensive collaboration. This dominance of multi-authored work is substantiated by a high Collaboration Co-efficient (CC) of 0.971, computed using the formula proposed by Subramanyam (1983), confirming that Indian research in this field is predominantly team-oriented and collaborative in nature.

Top Authors

Analysis of author contributions in nanocellulose research for biomedical applications reveals distinct patterns of productivity and impact. Among 2,629 authors, 46 authors with five or more publications contributed 358 papers (51.73% of total output) and 16,496 citations. Thomas P. Sabu (Mahatma Gandhi University, Kerala, India) stands out as both the most productive and most impactful author, with 38 publications, 2,392 citations, a CPP of 62.95, and an RCI of 1.37. Other highly productive authors include Ashok Pandey (13 publications; CPP = 46.23; RCI = 1.00), R. Reshmy (13 publications; CPP = 37.69; RCI = 0.82), R. A. Ilyas (12 publications; CPP = 45.58; RCI = 0.99), Binod G. Parameswaran (11 publications; CPP = 44.82; RCI = 0.97), and Eapen Philip (11 publications; CPP = 42.73; RCI = 0.93), reflecting sustained scholarly output (Table 4).

From an impact perspective, several authors exhibit exceptionally high citation intensity despite relatively modest productivity. These include Vijay Kumar Thakur (5 publications; 753 citations; CPP = 150.60; RCI = 3.27), Hanieh Kargarzadeh (5 publications; 710 citations; CPP = 142.00; RCI = 3.08), Laly A. Pothan (6 publications; 725 citations; CPP = 120.83; RCI = 2.62), and Deepu A. Gopakumar (8 publications; 628 citations; CPP = 78.50; RCI = 1.70). Collectively, these authors contributed 24 publications but received 2,816 citations, indicating a highly concentrated citation impact. Ashok Pandey also features among the top impactful authors, highlighting both consistent productivity and scholarly influence (Table 4).

The co-authorship network groups 22 authors into four distinct clusters, reflecting collaborative patterns in Indian nanocellulose research for biomedical applications. Cluster 1 (red), the largest group with eight authors such as Chirayil, Cintil Jose; Gopakumar, Deepu A.; Grohens, Yves; Kalarikkal, Nandakumar; Kargarzadeh, Hanieh; Pasquini, Daniel; Pothan, Laly A.; and Sabu, Thomas P. indicates a well-established and closely connected research team. Cluster 2 (green) includes seven authors such as Awasthi, Mukesh Kumar; Madhwa, Aryan D.; Pandey, Ashok; Parameswaran, Bindu G.; Philip, Eapen; Reshmy, R.; and Sindhu, Ravendran suggesting another active collaborative group. Cluster 3 (blue) comprises four authors of Li, Xingping; Maji, Pradip K.; Saini, V.; and Yadav, Chandravati such as representing a smaller yet cohesive partnership. Cluster 4 (yellow), with three authors—Dalvi, Yogesh B.; Mathew, Tiju Joseph; and Unni, Rekha such as reflects an emerging collaborative unit. These clusters demonstrate the presence of focused research groups contributing to the development of nanocellulose applications in the biomedical domain (Figure 1).

Click to enlarge

Top Affiliations

Of the 1,619 organizations identified in the dataset, 48 institutions meet the threshold of five or more publications. As shown in Table 5, the top 40 affiliations collectively produced 441 publications, accounting for 63.73% of the total research output, and received 19,290 citations. In contrast, the remaining 251 publications, representing 36.27% of the output, accounted for 23,812 citations. In terms of research productivity, Mahatma Gandhi University, Kerala, India ranks first, contributing 43 publications and receiving 4,116 citations, with a CPP of 95.72. This is followed by the Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee, UK, India (29 publications; 953 citations; CPP = 32.86), Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research (ACSIR), Uttar Pradesh, India (18 publications; CPP = 27.78), Bishop Moore College, Kerala, India (18 publications; CPP = 81.17), Chandigarh University, Punjab, India (18 publications; CPP = 12.06), and the Indian Institute of Technology, New Delhi, India (17 publications; CPP = 34.94), reflecting sustained institutional productivity.

In terms of impact perspective, several institutions exhibit exceptionally high citation intensity despite relatively modest publication counts. The Centre of Innovative and Applied Bioprocessing, Mohali, Punjab, India leads in citation impact with a CPP of 175.33 from six publications, followed by the Institute – Centre for Molecular and Macromolecular Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Lodz, Poland (CPP = 142.00; five publications) and Newman College, Kerala, India (CPP = 125.77; 13 publications). The Shiv Nadar Institution of Eminence Deemed to Be University, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India (CPP = 113.67; six publications) also demonstrates high-impact research performance, substantially exceeding the overall average CPP of 43.74 observed among the top 40 affiliations.

Top Leading Countries

Table 6 presents a comparative assessment of country-wise research performance in nanocellulose for biomedical applications, revealing marked disparities between publication output, citation impact, and collaboration strength. India dominates in terms of productivity with 692 publications, accounting for 50.87% of the total output, yet attains a comparatively modest citation impact (TC = 23,812; CPP = 34.41; TLS = 433), contributing only 17.91% of total citations. In contrast, the top 15 contributing countries collectively produced 340 publications (49.13%) but garnered a substantially higher citation share of 82.09% (TC = 19,548; CPP = 57.49; TLS = 756), underscoring stronger research influence and international collaboration. Among individual countries, the United States leads in publication output (TP = 49; TC = 1,763; CPP = 35.98; TLS = 96), followed closely by Malaysia (TP = 44; CPP = 43.84; TLS = 103) and South Korea (TP = 38; CPP = 40.58; TLS = 78). China (CPP = 50.09) and the United Kingdom (CPP = 61.05) demonstrate balanced performance in both output and impact, while France (CPP = 141.83), Brazil (CPP = 139.62), and Canada (CPP = 126.05) stand out for exceptionally high citation intensity despite relatively lower publication counts.

The analysis revealed five distinct clusters comprising 15 countries. Cluster 1 (red) includes China, India, Saudi Arabia, and South Korea, indicating strong research activity from Asian countries with growing and established contributions in nanocellulose-based biomedical research. Cluster 2 (green), consisting of Australia, Indonesia, and Malaysia, reflects collaborative research efforts from Oceania and Southeast Asia, particularly in biomaterials and medical applications. Cluster 3 (blue) comprises Canada, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, countries well known for advanced research infrastructure and significant contributions to nanocellulose development and biomedical innovations. Cluster 4 (yellow) includes Taiwan, Thailand, and the United States, representing a mix of Asian and North American leadership in nanotechnology-driven biomedical research. Finally, Cluster 5 (purple), consisting of Brazil and France, highlights contributions from South America and Europe, forming a smaller yet important cluster in the global research landscape of nanocellulose and its biomedical applications (Figure 2).

Click to enlarge

Top 15 Cited Works

The top 15 cited papers (Table 7) demonstrate that review articles and methodological studies have played a crucial role in shaping Indian research on nanocellulose for biomedical applications. The most cited work by Thomas et al. (2018), published in Chemical Reviews with 1,402 citations, presents nanocellulose as a sustainable and versatile material platform. Other highly cited reviews by George and Sabapathi (2015) and Sharma et al. (2019) focus on the synthesis, properties, and applications of cellulose nanomaterials. Several influential studies emphasize extraction techniques and surface modification methods, notably Cherian et al. (2010) and Kalia et al. (2014), which provided essential methodological foundations for subsequent biomedical research. Contributions by Joseph et al. (2020) and Sharma et al. (2020) highlight the expanding application of nanocellulose in biomedical and antimicrobial contexts. The prominence of journals such as Chemical Reviews, Carbohydrate Polymers, and Cellulose further reflects the interdisciplinary character of this research. Collectively, these highly cited works establish the conceptual and methodological basis supporting biomedical applications of nanocellulose.

Top Keywords

Table 8 highlights the dominant thematic orientation of Indian research on nanocellulose for biomedical applications through keyword frequency and network connectivity. Core material-centric terms such as Nanocellulose (Occ. 294; TLS 6446) and Cellulose (Occ. 285; TLS 6789) exhibit the highest occurrences and link strengths, indicating their central conceptual role in the research network. Strong emphasis on biological suitability is evident from highly connected terms like Biocompatibility (Occ. 182; TLS 4564), Tissue Engineering (Occ. 84; TLS 2496), Wound Healing (Occ. 56; TLS 1854), and Scaffolds (Occ. 63; TLS 1656), reflecting the translational focus towards regenerative medicine.

The VOS viewer keyword co-occurrence map illustrates the conceptual structure of Indian research on Nanocellulose for biomedical applications through three prominent thematic clusters (Figure 3). The cluster 1 (red) centres on Nanocellulose (Occ.-294; TLS-6446), cellulose (Occ.-285; TLS-6789), nano-cellulose (Occ.-149; TLS-3082), cellulose nanofibers (Occ.-53; TLS-1267), and cellulose nanocrystals (Occ.-43; TLS-1209), closely linked with controlled drug delivery (Occ.-76; TLS-1598), targeted drug delivery (Occ.-71; TLS-1550), and biomedical applications (Occ.-69; TLS-1467), indicating a strong emphasis on material development for therapeutic delivery systems. The cluster 2 (green) groups characterization and composite-related terms such as Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (Occ.-105; TLS-300), X-ray diffraction (Occ.-9; TLS-255), nanocomposite (Occ.-71; TLS-2209), chitosan (Occ.-48; TLS-1670), and silver nanoparticle (Occ.-18; TLS-613), reflecting the focus on physicochemical analysis and hybrid material formation to enhance functional performance. The cluster 3 (blue) is dominated by application-oriented terms including biocompatibility (Occ.-182; TLS-4564), tissue engineering (Occ.-84; TLS-2496), wound healing (Occ.-56; TLS-1854), scaffolds (biology) (Occ.-63; TLS-1656), hydrogel (Occ.-32; TLS-1116), and biomaterial (Occ.-54; TLS-1883), highlighting the translational orientation toward regenerative medicine. Dense interlinkages among clusters, particularly around biocompatibility and nanocellulose, demonstrate strong integration between material characterization, composite development, and biomedical application domains, confirming the interdisciplinary and application-driven nature of this research field.

Click to enlarge

DISCUSSION

The scientometric evidence indicates a distinct progression in Indian research on nanocellulose for biomedical applications from an initial phase of limited but highly influential studies to a recent phase characterized by substantial growth in publication output. During 2010–2018, only 92 publications (13.29%) were produced; however, these works received 9,333 citations with a notably high CPP of 358.96, underscoring the foundational contribution of early investigations. In contrast, the period 2019–2025 accounts for 600 publications (86.71%) with a CPP of 24.13, reflecting rapid expansion in research activity and the effect of citation latency associated with recent publications. The highest annual productivity is observed in 2025 (149 publications; 21.53%), followed by 2024 and 2022.

The document-type distribution shows that journal articles (46.10%) form the primary channel of research dissemination, while review articles (25.00%) account for the largest share of citations (12,655), indicating their significant role in consolidating knowledge and guiding subsequent studies. The authorship pattern demonstrates a strong collaborative culture, supported by a high Collaboration Co-efficient of 0.971 and the predominance of multi-authored papers, particularly those involving three to eight authors. Co-authorship network analysis further reveals four coherent author clusters comprising 22 key contributors, reflecting structured and sustained research collaborations.

Institutional analysis highlights that the top 40 affiliations contribute 63.73% of the total publications, with Mahatma Gandhi University emerging as the leading contributor in both productivity (43 publications) and impact (CPP = 95.72). Several institutions with fewer publications exhibit exceptionally high CPP values, indicating focused research excellence. Although India contributes 50.87% of the total global publications in this domain, its share of citations (17.91%) suggests the need for broader international engagement to enhance research visibility and impact.

Highly cited papers are predominantly reviewed and methodological studies published in reputed journals such as Chemical Reviews, Carbohydrate Polymers, and Cellulose, which have established the conceptual and technical foundation for biomedical applications of nanocellulose. The keyword co-occurrence and network visualization analyses identify three interrelated thematic clusters linking nanocellulose materials, physicochemical characterization techniques (e.g., FTIR, SEM, XRD), composite development, and application areas including drug delivery, tissue engineering, scaffolds, hydrogels, and wound healing. The close interconnections among these themes demonstrate that Indian research in this field is interdisciplinary in nature and increasingly oriented toward translational biomedical applications.

CONCLUSION

This bibliometric assessment of 692 Scopus-indexed publications (2010–2025) demonstrates the steady evolution and growing maturity of Indian research on nanocellulose for biomedical applications. Early contributions, though limited in volume, exerted high citation influence and established the foundational concepts of the field, while the sharp rise in publications after 2019 peaking in 2024-2025 reflects expanding research capacity and sustained scholarly interest. Journal articles account for the majority of output, whereas review papers achieve greater citation impact, underscoring the complementary roles of experimental research and knowledge consolidation. The high Collaboration Coefficient (0.971) and clustered co-authorship networks highlight the strongly collaborative nature of this domain, with a small number of institutions contributing disproportionately to output and citation impact, indicating focused research excellence. Although India leads globally in publication volume, its relatively lower citation shares points to the need for enhanced international collaboration, improved research visibility, and stronger engagement with global research networks. The thematic landscape reveals an integrated research focus spanning nanocellulose synthesis, characterization, composite fabrication, and biomedical applications such as drug delivery, tissue engineering, hydrogels, scaffolds, and wound healing. Future research should prioritize translational and application-oriented studies, including clinical validation, biocompatibility and safety assessment, standardization and scalability of fabrication processes, regulatory alignment, and the development of advanced functionalized nanocellulose systems through interdisciplinary and international collaborations to strengthen global impact.