Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35544307›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2022

Research on Digital Technology Use in Cardiology: Bibliometric Analysis.

Andy Wai Kan Yeung, Stefan Tino Kulnik, Emil D Parvanov, Anna Fassl, Fabian Eibensteiner, Sabine Völkl-Kernstock, Maria Kletecka-Pulker, Rik Crutzen, Johanna Gutenberg, Isabel Höppchen and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
–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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Technological Advances in the Diagnosis of Cardiovascular Disease: A Public Health Strategy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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

14 authors.

Andy Wai Kan YeungDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Applied Oral Sciences and Community Dental Care, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.ORCID 0000-0003-3672-357X
Stefan Tino KulnikLudwig Boltzmann Institute for Digital Health and Prevention, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-5419-6713
Emil D ParvanovLudwig Boltzmann Institute Digital Health and Patient Safety, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-6744-0949
Anna FasslLudwig Boltzmann Institute Digital Health and Patient Safety, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-6850-6532
Fabian EibensteinerLudwig Boltzmann Institute Digital Health and Patient Safety, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-5012-3082
Sabine Völkl-KernstockLudwig Boltzmann Institute Digital Health and Patient Safety, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-1951-1893
Maria Kletecka-PulkerLudwig Boltzmann Institute Digital Health and Patient Safety, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-4901-7930
Rik CrutzenLudwig Boltzmann Institute for Digital Health and Prevention, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-3731-6610
Johanna GutenbergLudwig Boltzmann Institute for Digital Health and Prevention, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-6130-701X
Isabel HöppchenLudwig Boltzmann Institute for Digital Health and Prevention, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-7725-766X
Josef NiebauerLudwig Boltzmann Institute for Digital Health and Prevention, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-2811-9041
Jan David SmeddinckLudwig Boltzmann Institute for Digital Health and Prevention, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-0562-8473
Harald WillschkeLudwig Boltzmann Institute Digital Health and Patient Safety, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-9093-7563
Atanas G AtanasovLudwig Boltzmann Institute Digital Health and Patient Safety, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-2545-0967

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital technology uses in cardiology have become a popular research focus in recent years. However, there has been no published bibliometric report that analyzed the corresponding academic literature in order to derive key publishing trends and characteristics of this scientific area.

objectiveWe used a bibliometric approach to identify and analyze the academic literature on digital technology uses in cardiology, and to unveil popular research topics, key authors, institutions, countries, and journals. We further captured the cardiovascular conditions and diagnostic tools most commonly investigated within this field.

methodsThe Web of Science electronic database was queried to identify relevant papers on digital technology uses in cardiology. Publication and citation data were acquired directly from the database. Complete bibliographic data were exported to VOSviewer, a dedicated bibliometric software package, and related to the semantic content of titles, abstracts, and keywords. A term map was constructed for findings visualization.

resultsThe analysis was based on data from 12,529 papers. Of the top 5 most productive institutions, 4 were based in the United States. The United States was the most productive country (4224/12,529, 33.7%), followed by United Kingdom (1136/12,529, 9.1%), Germany (1067/12,529, 8.5%), China (682/12,529, 5.4%), and Italy (622/12,529, 5.0%). Cardiovascular diseases that had been frequently investigated included hypertension (152/12,529, 1.2%), atrial fibrillation (122/12,529, 1.0%), atherosclerosis (116/12,529, 0.9%), heart failure (106/12,529, 0.8%), and arterial stiffness (80/12,529, 0.6%). Recurring modalities were electrocardiography (170/12,529, 1.4%), angiography (127/12,529, 1.0%), echocardiography (127/12,529, 1.0%), digital subtraction angiography (111/12,529, 0.9%), and photoplethysmography (80/12,529, 0.6%). For a literature subset on smartphone apps and wearable devices, the Journal of Medical Internet Research (20/632, 3.2%) and other JMIR portfolio journals (51/632, 8.0%) were the major publishing venues.

conclusionsDigital technology uses in cardiology target physicians, patients, and the general public. Their functions range from assisting diagnosis, recording cardiovascular parameters, and patient education, to teaching laypersons about cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This field already has had a great impact in health care, and we anticipate continued growth.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchCardiologyMobile ApplicationsBibliometricsDigital TechnologyHumansUnited Statesatrial fibrillationcardiaccardiologycardiopulmonary resuscitationcardiovascularelectrocardiographyhealth applicationhearthypertensionphotoplethysmographywearable device, digital health, mHealth

Identifiers

PMID35544307
PMCPMC9133979

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.