SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2024
Global research trends and hotspots of artificial intelligence research in spinal cord neural injury and restoration-a bibliometrics and visualization analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Tracing the evolving dynamics and research hotspots of spinal cord injury and surgical decompression from 1975 to 2024: a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Transcriptomics Insights into Spinal Cord Injury for Therapy Development.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- AI in Clinical Decision Support Systems: Promising Applications and Strategies for Managing Data Challenges.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tear Diagnosis: A Bibliometric Analysis of the 50 Most Cited Studies.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2026Review
- Innovative Assistive Technologies for Tetraplegia: A Narrative Review of Systematic and Emerging Evidence.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Behavior recognition and assessment of spinal dysfunction based on an attention mechanism.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Revolutionizing spine surgery with emerging AI-FEA integration.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Review
- Precision Recovery After Spinal Cord Injury: Integrating CRISPR Technologies, AI-Driven Therapeutics, Single-Cell Omics, and System Neuroregeneration.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Letter to the Editor: Commentary on Using Artificial Intelligence in the Comprehensive Management of Spinal Cord Injury (Korean journal of neurotrauma · 2025Article
- Microglial TREM2 and cognitive impairment: insights from Alzheimer's disease with implications for spinal cord injury and AI-assisted therapeutics.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence in autoimmune diseases: a bibliometric exploration of the past two decades.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- The diagnostic and prognostic capability of artificial intelligence in spinal cord injury: A systematic review.Brain & spine · 2025Review
- Towards Transforming Neurorehabilitation: The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Diagnosis and Treatment of Neurological Disorders.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: A Specialty-Level Overview of Emerging AI Trends.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) technology has made breakthroughs in spinal cord neural injury and restoration in recent years. It has a positive impact on clinical treatment. This study explores AI research's progress and hotspots in spinal cord neural injury and restoration. It also analyzes research shortcomings related to this area and proposes potential solutions. Methods: We used CiteSpace 6.1.R6 and VOSviewer 1.6.19 to research WOS articles on AI research in spinal cord neural injury and restoration. Results: A total of 1,502 articles were screened, in which the United States dominated; Kadone, Hideki (13 articles, University of Tsukuba, JAPAN) was the author with the highest number of publications; ARCH PHYS MED REHAB (IF = 4.3) was the most cited journal, and topics included molecular biology, immunology, neurology, sports, among other related areas. Conclusion: We pinpointed three research hotspots for AI research in spinal cord neural injury and restoration: (1) intelligent robots and limb exoskeletons to assist rehabilitation training; (2) brain-computer interfaces; and (3) neuromodulation and noninvasive electrical stimulation. In addition, many new hotspots were discussed: (1) starting with image segmentation models based on convolutional neural networks; (2) the use of AI to fabricate polymeric biomaterials to provide the microenvironment required for neural stem cell-derived neural network tissues; (3) AI survival prediction tools, and transcription factor regulatory networks in the field of genetics were discussed. Although AI research in spinal cord neural injury and restoration has many benefits, the technology has several limitations (data and ethical issues). The data-gathering problem should be addressed in future research, which requires a significant sample of quality clinical data to build valid AI models. At the same time, research on genomics and other mechanisms in this field is fragile. In the future, machine learning techniques, such as AI survival prediction tools and transcription factor regulatory networks, can be utilized for studies related to the up-regulation of regeneration-related genes and the production of structural proteins for axonal growth.
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.