For this bibliometric analysis, the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) and PubMed databases were utilized as the primary data sources. The retrieval strategy was formulated based on specific topic searches. For WoSCC, the field tag “TS” (Topic) was used, and for PubMed, the tag “[Title/Abstract]” was applied to ensure precision. The search queries combined keywords related to natural medicines (e.g., “Nature medicine,” “Traditional Chinese medicine,” “Phytochemical”) and ionizing radiation (e.g., “Ionizing Radiation,” “Radiation Protection,” “Radioprotective”). The specific search strings are detailed in Figure 1.

The search period was from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2025. The initial search yielded a total of 701 records, comprising 410 from WoSCC and 291 from PubMed. Subsequently, 228 duplicate records were identified and removed, resulting in a dataset of 473 unique publications. As depicted in Figure 1, a detailed exclusion process was then applied to these 473 papers. Book chapters (n=8), proceeding papers (n=5), and early access publications (n=6) were excluded from the dataset. Furthermore, publications were screened to exclude non-English papers (n=1) and articles irrelevant to the subject (n=3). Finally, a total of 450 publications were identified as eligible for bibliometric analysis.

The full records and cited references were exported from the WoSCC database in plain text format. VOSviewer software (version 1.6.17) was used to perform co-occurrence analysis of all keywords and to map the co-authorship networks of organizations, authors, and countries. For co-cited authors, references, and journals, the minimum appearance thresholds were set to 30, 13, and 120, respectively. For co-authorship analysis, the minimum appearance frequencies for authors, organizations, and countries were set at 5, 5, and 3, respectively.

CiteSpace software (version 6.1.R6) was employed to conduct co-occurrence analysis and burst detection of keywords. The time range for this analysis was set from January 2001 to December 2025, with each time slice representing one year. The cosine algorithm was used to calculate relationship strength links. The Pathfinder algorithm was selected for network pruning, with the “Pruning networks” method as an auxiliary strategy; all other settings were kept at their defaults. Subsequently, cluster analysis was performed on the keyword co-occurrence network, and the log-likelihood rate (LLR) algorithm was used to extract cluster tags (13–15).

A total of 450 research articles and reviews in English were included in the final analysis. As presented in Figures 2A, the majority of publications were articles (72%), while reviews constituted the remaining 28%. The annual publication output on NMs against IR demonstrates a marked increasing trend, with a corresponding cumulative growth over the study period (Figure 2B). This growth was particularly pronounced from 2018 onwards, with 2022, 2023, and 2024 showing high publication counts of 43, 37, and 45 publications, respectively. This surge indicates a growing recognition of and research interest in this topic. Analysis of subject categories (Figure 2C) reveals the interdisciplinary nature of this field, with the top five categories being Pharmacology & Pharmacy (20.0%), Plant Sciences (9.8%), Biochemistry & Molecular Biology (7.3%), Oncology (7.3%), and Integrative & Complementary Medicine (6.0%).

The field of NMs against IR is characterized by extensive collaboration among numerous authors, institutions, and countries. The author co-authorship network (Figure 3A) highlights key researchers such as Jagetia, GC, Baliga, MS, Samarth, RM, and Weiss, JF, who appear prominently within collaborative clusters, indicating their significant roles in driving research.

Analysis of national contributions (Figure 3B) reveals that India is the most prolific country, with 148 publications and 3813 citations, followed by the People’s Republic of China (99 publications, 1670 citations) and the USA (43 publications, 1797 citations). These nations have established themselves as the most active in the field, with India in particular displaying a robust network of both internal and external collaborations.

The co-authorship map of organizations (Figure 3C) shows that the most productive institutions are predominantly from India and China. For instance, the University of Rajasthan (India) led with 17 documents and 349 citations, followed by the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (India) with 12 documents and 227 citations. Notably, Father Muller Medical College (India) published 11 documents that garnered a remarkable 688 citations. Other significant contributors include the Institute of Nuclear Medicine & Allied Sciences (India), Kasturba Medical College & Hospital (India), and the Beijing Institute of Radiation Medicine (China), each with 10 documents. The high average citation rates for institutions like Father Muller Medical College and Kasturba Medical College & Hospital underscore the impactful nature of their research (Table 1).

Citation analysis serves as a reliable indicator of the quality and impact of scholarly work. The co-citation network for authors, visualized in Figures 4A, identifies Jagetia, GC (294 citations), Weiss, JF (97 citations), Hosseinimehr, SJ (87 citations), and Samarth, RM (83 citations) as central and highly influential figures whose work forms the intellectual foundation of the field.

Over the past two decades, a multitude of scholarly journals have published articles related to NMs against IR. Based on total citations, the leading journals include J Ethnopharmacol (615 citations), Radiat Res (504 citations), Phytother Res (439 citations), and Int J Radiat Biol (421 citations), as depicted in Figure 4B. These journals are distinguished by their high citation counts, reflecting their significant influence. The majority of these top-tier journals are classified in the Q1 or Q2 JCR divisions, testifying to their strong academic standing. Although India is a leading contributing country, the premier journals in this field are primarily based in Europe and the United States (Table 2).

Figure 4C illustrates the network of co-cited references, highlighting foundational publications. The most highly cited works include comprehensive reviews and seminal experimental studies that have profoundly shaped the understanding of radioprotective mechanisms. For instance, the articles “Protection against Ionizing Radiation by Antioxidant Nutrients and Phytochemicals” by Weiss, JF (2003) and the work by Arora, R (2005) in Phytotherapy Research are among the most frequently co-cited, demonstrating their enduring influence (1, 16). The top 10 globally cited references are listed in Table 3, with the work by Weiss (2003) ranking first.

Furthermore, an analysis of reference citation bursts using CiteSpace (Figure 5D) indicates emerging or sustained research interest in specific topics. Keywords such as “radiation protection,” “oxidative stress,” and “DNA damage” show strong and prolonged citation bursts, underscoring their foundational importance.

The analysis confirms a growing interest in NMs as countermeasures to IR. While research output was relatively modest from 2001 to 2011, the rate of publication accelerated significantly after 2012, with a notable surge from 2018 onwards (Figure 2B). This growth is likely attributable to advancements in molecular biology techniques, the advent of network pharmacology and bioinformatics methods, and an increasing global demand for effective and less toxic radioprotective and radiosensitizing agents (7, 8).

The co-authorship analysis of countries (Figure 3B) clearly establishes India and China as the dominant forces in this research domain, with India leading significantly in publication volume and citation impact. This leadership is likely fueled by their rich heritage in traditional medicine and substantial governmental support. As revealed by Figures 3C, the most productive institutions are predominantly from these two nations (Table 1), including the University of Rajasthan, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, and Father Muller Medical College in India, and the Beijing Institute of Radiation Medicine in China. The high academic impact of these institutions underscores their excellent research capabilities. To further advance the field, enhanced collaboration between scholars and institutions worldwide is encouraged.

The 450 articles analyzed were published in numerous scholarly journals. As indicated in Figures 4B, journals such as J Ethnopharmacol, Radiat Res, Phytother Res, and Int J Radiat Biol are among the most active and highly cited venues (Table 2). The prominence of these high-impact journals, many of which are in the Q1 and Q2 JCR divisions, signifies the high academic standing and quality of research in this field.

Analysis of cited references and keywords (Figure 4, Figure 5) reveals a clear developmental trend. The field has evolved from initial studies on the general efficacy of traditional medicines to rigorous investigations into the cellular and molecular mechanisms of radiation damage and protection, alongside the identification of specific active compounds using advanced technologies. Keywords such as network pharmacology and molecular docking show consistent and recent citation bursts (Figure 5D), reflecting a strong interest in systematic approaches to unravel complex pharmacological interactions. Other prominent hotspots include oxidative stress, inflammation, DNA damage, apoptosis, and radiosensitization, indicating a comprehensive focus on understanding and manipulating the biological responses to IR. The emergence of terms like nanoparticles suggests a new frontier in drug delivery and therapeutic efficacy (2, 4, 17, 18).

A diverse array of natural medicines has been extensively studied for their efficacy against IR. Among these, herbal medicines and their extracts are prominent. Ginseng is widely investigated for its radioprotective properties, including preventing radiation-induced DNA damage and reducing myelosuppression, liver injury, and apoptosis, with its active ginsenosides mediating these effects (10, 19, 20). Similarly, Triphala, an Ayurvedic polyherbal drug, has been shown to reduce radiation-induced mortality and protect against gastrointestinal and hematopoietic damage, primarily via antioxidant mechanisms (21). Sea Buckthorn is explored for its broad medicinal potential, including cytoprotective, anti-stress, and radioprotective effects (9). Emblica officinalis, or Indian gooseberry, shows potent radioprotective and chemopreventive effects through free radical scavenging and antioxidant activities (11, 22). Other notable herbs include Aegle marmelos (Bael), recognized for its antioxidant and radioprotective properties (23–25); Ophiocordyceps sinensis (formerly Cordyceps sinensis), which protects against bone marrow and intestinal injuries by reducing ROS (26); and Zingiber officinale (Ginger), whose rhizomes and phytochemicals possess radioprotective effects (12). Tinospora cordifolia (Guduchi) ameliorates radiation-induced testicular injury, while Mentha piperita (Peppermint) safeguards various radiosensitive organs through multiple mechanisms, including antioxidant activity and enhanced DNA repair (27–29). Angelica sinensis (Radix Angelica Sinensis) is used in TCM for various medicinal effects, including hematopoietic, antioxidant, immunoregulatory, and radioprotective activities (30). Traditional Chinese Medicine formulas like Bu-Zhong-Yi-Qi-Tang and Wuzi Yanzong pill have demonstrated protective effects on hematopoietic organs and testicular tissue, respectively (31, 32). Xuebijing injection also mitigates hematopoietic cell injury by decreasing ROS levels (33). Moringa oleifera (Drumstick tree) leaf extract ameliorates ionizing radiation-induced lipid peroxidation in mouse liver, with phytochemicals like ascorbic acid, phenolics contributing to its antioxidant effects (34). Grewia asiatica (Phalsa) fruit exhibits strong free radical scavenging activity and radioprotective efficacy, protecting against lipid peroxidation and DNA damage (35).

Furthermore, specific bioactive compounds isolated from these plants are at the forefront of research. Ferulic acid protects hepatocytes from radiation-induced damage, while chlorogenic acid and quinic acid shield human lymphocytes from DNA damage (36, 37). Mangiferin protects against radiation-induced sickness and mortality, and naringenin offers protection against DNA, chromosomal, and membrane damage by inhibiting the NF-κB pathway (38, 39). Resveratrol has demonstrated radioprotective activity against chromosomal damage (40). Isofraxidin, a coumarin compound, protects leukemia cells from apoptosis via the ROS/mitochondria pathway (41). Other compounds, such as eugenol, honokiol, and artesunate, show promise as radiosensitizers by inducing apoptosis and targeting key signaling pathways in cancer cells (3, 42, 43). Arbutin, an intracellular hydroxyl radical scavenger, protects cells from radiation-induced apoptosis (44). Paeoniflorin protects thymocytes by scavenging ROS and modulating MAP kinase pathways (45). Celastrol potentiates radiotherapy by impairing DNA damage processing, and berberine enhances radiosensitivity by targeting HIF-1α (46, 47). Finally, compounds like orientin and polysaccharide-polyphenolic conjugates are recognized for their broad radioprotective and antioxidant activities (6, 48).

Network pharmacology, a discipline grounded in systems biology, analyzes the complex interactions between drug components and multiple targets. This approach, which elucidates how drugs act on disease-related signaling modules, has become a promising tool for revealing the pharmacological mechanisms of traditional medicine formulas. It has been increasingly used to identify potential therapeutic targets of NMs and to understand their molecular mechanisms in combating IR-induced damage and enhancing radiosensitivity (30, 48).

To further clarify these complex mechanisms, researchers are increasingly combining network pharmacology with other approaches, such as molecular docking and experimental verification. Molecular docking is widely used to predict the binding conformation and free energy of small molecules to their protein targets. These integrated strategies have enabled more precise studies of the therapeutic mechanisms of NMs against radiation injury and cancer radioresistance by identifying specific molecular targets and pathways. The integration of comprehensive metabolomics with network pharmacology is also being used to reveal the metabolic impact and mechanisms of NMs in treating radiation-related conditions (49).

>Additionally, the simultaneous application of network pharmacology, molecular docking, and experimental verification has become a powerful methodology for revealing the mechanisms of traditional formulas in treating acute injuries and enhancing cancer therapy. This multi-omics approach facilitates the identification of active components, protein targets, and relevant signaling pathways, such as the PI3K/AKT pathway, within the context of cellular responses to radiation (20).

As summarized in Figures 6B, the protective functions of NMs against IR are mediated by several interconnected molecular mechanisms. Primarily, NMs provide robust antioxidant defense by directly scavenging reactive oxygen species (ROS), neutralizing free radicals, reducing lipid peroxidation, and activating the NRF2 pathway. NRF2 activation, in turn, upregulates key antioxidant enzymes such as HO-1, GPx, and SOD1, thereby enhancing the cell’s endogenous antioxidant capacity. In addition to their antioxidant activity, NMs exhibit significant anti-inflammatory properties. IR often triggers inflammatory responses through the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines and the activation of transcription factors like NF-κB. NMs can effectively block NF-κB activation and suppress the release of these inflammatory mediators. Furthermore, NMs play a crucial role in DNA damage repair and cell-cycle regulation, contributing to the maintenance of genomic stability. In terms of anti-fibrotic effects, which can be a long-term consequence of radiation, NMs help mitigate this process by inhibiting signaling pathways like TGF-β/Smad, modulating MAPK/JNK/ERK pathways, reducing the deposition of connective tissue growth factor (CTGF) and extracellular matrix (ECM), and restoring the balance of tissue remodeling enzymes. As illustrated by the example of ginseng in Figures 6A, NMs often employ a multi-targeted approach, which includes modulating apoptosis via the p53/Bax/Bcl-2 axis, enhancing immune responses, protecting hematopoietic stem cells, and ultimately reducing inflammation and tissue damage (50–53).

This bibliometric study has systematically analyzed the basic situation, research hotspots, and trends regarding the effects of NMs against IR from a visualization perspective. The results provide valuable insights for researchers already in or interested in this field. However, it is crucial to acknowledge certain inherent limitations. Firstly, distinct biomedical databases such as EMBASE, COCHRANE, CINAHL, and PROQUEST were not included in this analysis. This study primarily relied on the WoSCC database because it offers the most comprehensive and standardized citation data required for the algorithms of VOSviewer and CiteSpace. While the excluded databases contain valuable literature, merging data from disparate sources often introduces significant inconsistencies in citation counting and metadata formats, which can compromise the accuracy of the bibliometric mapping. Secondly, the analytical algorithms employed by VOSviewer and CiteSpace, while powerful, inherently involve certain processing parameters and thresholds (e.g., minimum co-occurrence frequencies, clustering algorithms). These choices, though standard, can introduce a degree of bias or subjectivity in the resulting visualizations and interpretations. Thirdly, restricting the analysis to English-language articles may have led to a language bias, potentially overlooking significant contributions published in other languages, especially considering the rich traditional medicine heritage in non-English speaking countries like China and India. Finally, bibliometric analyses heavily rely on citation counts, which may underestimate the impact of recently published, albeit high-quality, studies due to the time lag inherent in citation accumulation. Despite these limitations, this bibliometric study offers a valuable and comprehensive overview of the research landscape in the field of natural medicines against ionizing radiation.