SynthesisF1000Research2025
Mapping the landscape: A bibliometric analysis of AI and teacher collaboration in educational research.
Synthesis in F1000Research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Mapping the landscape: A bibliometric analysis of AI and teacher collaboration in educational research.F1000Research · 2025Pooled it
- Personalised and Collaborative Learning Experience (PCLE) Framework for AI-driven Learning Management System (LMS).F1000Research · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study intends to investigate the relationship between artificial intelligence and teachers' collaboration in educational research in response to the growing use of technologies and the current status of the field. Methods: A total of 62 publications were looked at through a systematic review that included data mining, analytics, and bibliometric methods. Result: The study shows a steady increase in the field of artificial intelligence and teacher collaboration in educational research, especially in the last few years with the involvement of the USA, China, and India. Education and information technology are the main contributors to this field of study, followed by an international review of open and distance learning research. The Scopus database was chosen for this study because of its extensive coverage of high-quality, peer-reviewed literature and robust indexing system, making it a dependable source for conducting bibliometric analyses. Scopus offers substantial information, citations tracking, and multidisciplinary coverage, which are critical for spotting publication trends, significant articles, major themes, and keywords in the area. The findings show that education and information technology make the most significant contributions to this sector, followed by international studies on open and distance learning. Conclusions: Over a three-year period, the average citation value is 12.44%. The education system, learning, e-learning, sustainability, COVID-19 issues, team challenges, organizational conflicts, and digital transformation are just a few of the topics it significantly contributes to. The study acknowledges its limitations and considers potential avenues for additional research. The results also emphasize important gaps in the literature, highlighting the necessity for more research. This information can help develop strategic approaches to address issues and take advantage of opportunities relating to artificial intelligence and teacher collaboration in higher education and research. The study's ultimate goal is to offer guidance for tactics that promote teachers' cooperation in educational research and the development of artificial intelligence.
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.