ArticleNature communications2024
The global geography of artificial intelligence in life science research.
Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Influential articles in autism and gut microbiota: bibliometric profile and research trends.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Pooled it
- Charting the rise of artificial intelligence in medical education: a global bibliometric and network analysis, 2000-2026.International journal of emergency medicine · 2026Review
- Mapping the AI life sciences landscape in Greece: a bibliometric comparison with global patterns.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Advocating the potential of artificial intelligence for syndrome discovery in syndromic surveillance systems: A scoping review.iScience · 2026Review
- Do world-wide policy initiatives for regulating health care related artificial intelligence safeguard the declaration of Helsinki?EClinicalMedicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Global English-language-dominated discourse on artificial intelligence in healthcare: a three-year longitudinal analysis of the #AIinHealthcare movement on X.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Exercise-Based Cardiovascular Health Interventions: A Scoping Review.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Review
- Global distribution of research efforts, disease burden, and impact of US public funding withdrawal.Nature medicine · 2025Article
- Beyond the Growth: A Registry-Based Analysis of Global Imbalances in Artificial Intelligence Clinical Trials.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Framework for bias evaluation in large language models in healthcare settings.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) promises to transform medicine, but the geographic concentration of AI expertize may hinder its equitable application. We analyze 397,967 AI life science research publications from 2000 to 2022 and 14.5 million associated citations, creating a global atlas that distinguishes productivity (i.e., publications), quality-adjusted productivity (i.e., publications stratified by field-normalized rankings of publishing outlets), and relevance (i.e., citations). While Asia leads in total publications, Northern America and Europe contribute most of the AI research appearing in high-ranking outlets, generating up to 50% more citations than other regions. At the global level, international collaborations produce more impactful research, but have stagnated relative to national research efforts. Our findings suggest that greater integration of global expertize could help AI deliver on its promise and contribute to better global health.
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.