Disputed Eponyms: Historical Errors in Terminologia Neuroanatomica

Introduction: eponyms are a deeply rooted historical feature of medical nomenclature, especially in neuroanatomy. The term“eponym” comes from Greek and refers to a name used to designate a structure in honor of the person considered to have initially described it. The objective of this study was to review the presence of some eponyms in Terminologia Neuroanatomica whose name does not correspond to the person who first identified or described them

Materials and Methods: a detailed review of the Terminologia Neuroanatomica was conducted to identify designations attributed to individuals other than the original authors or to detect historical inaccuracies due to misattribution.

Results: we identified eight missatributed eponyms. Although some appear in the other  column, these termsremain widely used in medical teaching and practice, including arachnoid, subarachnoid space, aqueduct of Sylvius, sulcus of Rolando, sulcus of Sylvius, Betz cell, Cajal-Retzius cell, and ganglion of Gasser.

Conclusion: other researchers mentioned or described these structures before the individuals to whom the eponyms are attributed. This work demosntrates that  the assigment of eponyms often reflect factors external to sientific research, including the influence of students, collegues, or mistranslations. This practice, althoug intented to honor, sometimes makes the true describers invisible and hinders anatomical education based on morphological and functional criteria. Therefore, there is a need to review and update the Terminologia Neuroanatomica to more accuralety relfect scientific history  and strengthen the rational teaching of morphology.

Historical trends and future key insights in osteology research: A global scientometrics and visual analysis

Background:

Osteology plays a central role in anatomical, biological, and clinical sciences. However, a comprehensive understanding of its global research landscape, historical development, and emerging trends has been lacking. This study aimed to fill that gap by conducting a scientometrics and visual analysis of bone tissue research over the past 190 years.

Methods:

A bibliometric study was conducted using Scopus, Web of Science All Collection, and PubMed. Publications were included if they focused on the structure or function of bones and were peer-reviewed articles. Variables included publication volume, journal quartile, citation metrics (h-index, g-index, m-index), collaboration networks, and keyword trends. Countries were classified by income level and geographic region.

Results:

A total of 8103 publications were included. The field showed modest growth until 1967, followed by a marked increase peaking in 2021. Most articles were original research (91%) and published in Q1 journals (63.9%). Europe and the Americas accounted for over 80% of publications, while low- and lower-middle-income countries contributed <4%. High-income countries dominated Q1 output and collaboration networks. The most common keywords included phylogeny, osteoporosis, and dinosaur. Technological and molecular approaches have become more prominent since the 2000s.

Conclusions:

This is the first global scientometrics analysis of osteology research. It reveals historical trends, regional inequalities, and thematic evolution, offering valuable insights for researchers, institutions, and policymakers to foster more inclusive and strategically guided research in osteology.