ReviewCancer innovation2023
A bibliometric analysis of worldwide cancer research using machine learning methods.
Review in Cancer innovation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Machine learning-based myocardial infarction bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- A 20-Year Bibliometric Analysis of theKorean journal of neurotrauma · 2026Review
- A bibliometric study on mathematical oncology: interdisciplinarity, internationality, collaboration and trending topics.Bulletin of mathematical biology · 2025Article
- Global research and current trends on nanotherapy in lung cancer research: a bibliometric analysis of 20 years.Discover oncology · 2024Article
- A bibliometric analysis of worldwide cancer research using machine learning methods.Cancer innovation · 2023Review
- Development and validation of a machine learning model for predicting postherpetic neuralgia risk.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the progress and development of computer technology, applying machine learning methods to cancer research has become an important research field. To analyze the most recent research status and trends, main research topics, topic evolutions, research collaborations, and potential directions of this research field, this study conducts a bibliometric analysis on 6206 research articles worldwide collected from PubMed between 2011 and 2021 concerning cancer research using machine learning methods. Python is used as a tool for bibliometric analysis, Gephi is used for social network analysis, and the Latent Dirichlet Allocation model is used for topic modeling. The trend analysis of articles not only reflects the innovative research at the intersection of machine learning and cancer but also demonstrates its vigorous development and increasing impacts. In terms of journals,
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.