Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32012074›Full record

ReviewJournal of medical Internet research2020

Systematic Evaluation of Research Progress on Natural Language Processing in Medicine Over the Past 20 Years: Bibliometric Study on PubMed.

Jing Wang, Huan Deng, Bangtao Liu, Anbin Hu, Jun Liang, Lingye Fan, Xu Zheng, Tong Wang, Jianbo Lei

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Jing WangSchool of Medical Informatics and Engineering, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0002-7005-2127
Huan DengSchool of Medical Informatics and Engineering, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2241-367X
Bangtao LiuSchool of Medical Informatics and Engineering, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0002-0402-2819
Anbin HuSchool of Medical Informatics and Engineering, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8610-6313
Jun LiangIT Center, Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0002-0551-6706
Lingye FanAffiliated Hospital, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0002-0994-7984
Xu ZhengCenter for Medical Informatics, Peking University, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0001-5523-7177
Tong WangSchool of Public Health, Jilin University, Jilin, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4422-6197
Jianbo LeiSchool of Medical Informatics and Engineering, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0002-1744-0235

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNatural language processing (NLP) is an important traditional field in computer science, but its application in medical research has faced many challenges. With the extensive digitalization of medical information globally and increasing importance of understanding and mining big data in the medical field, NLP is becoming more crucial.

objectiveThe goal of the research was to perform a systematic review on the use of NLP in medical research with the aim of understanding the global progress on NLP research outcomes, content, methods, and study groups involved.

methodsA systematic review was conducted using the PubMed database as a search platform. All published studies on the application of NLP in medicine (except biomedicine) during the 20 years between 1999 and 2018 were retrieved. The data obtained from these published studies were cleaned and structured. Excel (Microsoft Corp) and VOSviewer (Nees Jan van Eck and Ludo Waltman) were used to perform bibliometric analysis of publication trends, author orders, countries, institutions, collaboration relationships, research hot spots, diseases studied, and research methods.

resultsA total of 3498 articles were obtained during initial screening, and 2336 articles were found to meet the study criteria after manual screening. The number of publications increased every year, with a significant growth after 2012 (number of publications ranged from 148 to a maximum of 302 annually). The United States has occupied the leading position since the inception of the field, with the largest number of articles published. The United States contributed to 63.01% (1472/2336) of all publications, followed by France (5.44%, 127/2336) and the United Kingdom (3.51%, 82/2336). The author with the largest number of articles published was Hongfang Liu (70), while Stéphane Meystre (17) and Hua Xu (33) published the largest number of articles as the first and corresponding authors. Among the first author's affiliation institution, Columbia University published the largest number of articles, accounting for 4.54% (106/2336) of the total. Specifically, approximately one-fifth (17.68%, 413/2336) of the articles involved research on specific diseases, and the subject areas primarily focused on mental illness (16.46%, 68/413), breast cancer (5.81%, 24/413), and pneumonia (4.12%, 17/413).

conclusionsNLP is in a period of robust development in the medical field, with an average of approximately 100 publications annually. Electronic medical records were the most used research materials, but social media such as Twitter have become important research materials since 2015. Cancer (24.94%, 103/413) was the most common subject area in NLP-assisted medical research on diseases, with breast cancers (23.30%, 24/103) and lung cancers (14.56%, 15/103) accounting for the highest proportions of studies. Columbia University and the talents trained therein were the most active and prolific research forces on NLP in the medical field.

Indexed as

BibliometricsNatural Language ProcessingHumansPrecision MedicinePubMedTime Factorsclinicalelectronic medical recordinformation extractionmedicinenatural language processing

Identifiers

PMID32012074
PMCPMC7005695

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.