Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40040909›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2025

A bibliometric analysis of studies on artificial intelligence in neuroscience.

Ugur Tekin, Murat Dener

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

2 authors.

Ugur TekinDepartment of Information Security Engineering, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Gazi University, Ankara, Türkiye.
Murat DenerDepartment of Information Security Engineering, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Gazi University, Ankara, Türkiye.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The incorporation of artificial intelligence (AI) into neuroscience has the potential to significantly enhance our comprehension of brain function and facilitate more effective diagnosis and treatment of neurological disorders. Artificial intelligence (AI) techniques, particularly deep learning and machine learning, offer transformative solutions by improving the analysis of complex neural data, facilitating early diagnosis, and enabling personalized treatment approaches. A bibliometric analysis is a method that employs quantitative techniques for the examination of scientific literature, with the objective of identifying trends in research, evaluating the impact of influential studies, and mapping the networks of collaboration. In light of the accelerated growth and interdisciplinary scope of AI applications in neuroscience, a bibliometric analysis is vital for mapping the landscape, identifying pivotal contributions, and underscoring emerging areas of interest. This study aims to address this need by examining 1,208 studies published between 1983 and 2024 from the Web of Science database. The analysis reveals a notable surge in publications since the mid-2010s, with substantial advancements in neurological imaging, brain-computer interfaces (BCI), and the diagnosis and treatment of neurological diseases. The analysis underscores the pioneering role of countries such as the United States, China, and the United Kingdom in this field and highlights the prevalence of international collaboration. This study offers a comprehensive overview of the current state and future directions of AI applications in neuroscience, as well as an examination of the transformative potential of AI in advancing neurological research and healthcare. It is recommended that future research address the ethical issues, data privacy concerns, and interpretability of AI models in order to fully capitalize on the benefits of AI in neuroscience.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencebibliometric analysisneuroscienceresearch trendscientometric analysis

Identifiers

PMID40040909
PMCPMC11877006

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.