Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38064255›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2023

Mapping the Bibliometrics Landscape of AI in Medicine: Methodological Study.

Jin Shi, David Bendig, Horst Christian Vollmar, Peter Rasche

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Competition and Collaboration in the AI Race: Country-LevelDirectional Evidence for Risk Monitoring and Policy.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

4 authors.

Jin ShiInstitute for Entrepreneurship, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5911-4385
David BendigInstitute for Entrepreneurship, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7805-1487
Horst Christian VollmarInstitute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0117-7188
Peter RascheDepartment of Healthcare, University of Applied Science - Hochschule Niederrhein, Krefeld, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7974-8668

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI), conceived in the 1950s, has permeated numerous industries, intensifying in tandem with advancements in computing power. Despite the widespread adoption of AI, its integration into medicine trails other sectors. However, medical AI research has experienced substantial growth, attracting considerable attention from researchers and practitioners.

objectiveIn the absence of an existing framework, this study aims to outline the current landscape of medical AI research and provide insights into its future developments by examining all AI-related studies within PubMed over the past 2 decades. We also propose potential data acquisition and analysis methods, developed using Python (version 3.11) and to be executed in Spyder IDE (version 5.4.3), for future analogous research.

methodsOur dual-pronged approach involved (1) retrieving publication metadata related to AI from PubMed (spanning 2000-2022) via Python, including titles, abstracts, authors, journals, country, and publishing years, followed by keyword frequency analysis and (2) classifying relevant topics using latent Dirichlet allocation, an unsupervised machine learning approach, and defining the research scope of AI in medicine. In the absence of a universal medical AI taxonomy, we used an AI dictionary based on the European Commission Joint Research Centre AI Watch report, which emphasizes 8 domains: reasoning, planning, learning, perception, communication, integration and interaction, service, and AI ethics and philosophy.

resultsFrom 2000 to 2022, a comprehensive analysis of 307,701 AI-related publications from PubMed highlighted a 36-fold increase. The United States emerged as a clear frontrunner, producing 68,502 of these articles. Despite its substantial contribution in terms of volume, China lagged in terms of citation impact. Diving into specific AI domains, as the Joint Research Centre AI Watch report categorized, the learning domain emerged dominant. Our classification analysis meticulously traced the nuanced research trajectories across each domain, revealing the multifaceted and evolving nature of AI's application in the realm of medicine.

conclusionsThe research topics have evolved as the volume of AI studies increases annually. Machine learning remains central to medical AI research, with deep learning expected to maintain its fundamental role. Empowered by predictive algorithms, pattern recognition, and imaging analysis capabilities, the future of AI research in medicine is anticipated to concentrate on medical diagnosis, robotic intervention, and disease management. Our topic modeling outcomes provide a clear insight into the focus of AI research in medicine over the past decades and lay the groundwork for predicting future directions. The domains that have attracted considerable research attention, primarily the learning domain, will continue to shape the trajectory of AI in medicine. Given the observed growing interest, the domain of AI ethics and philosophy also stands out as a prospective area of increased focus.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceRoboticsAlgorithmsBibliometricsHumansPrecision MedicineAIAI in medicineartificial intelligencelatent Dirichlet allocationLDAmedical AI taxonomyPythontopic modelingunsupervised machine learning

Identifiers

PMID38064255
PMCPMC10746970

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.