SynthesisFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025
Big data in financial risk management: evidence, advances, and open questions: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI-driven financial risk management in complex mobile economies: a contextual-technology fit and security reassurance model.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Conservative plausibility-filtered SMOTE for credit card fraud detection under extreme class imbalance.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- FinTextSim: a domain-specific sentence-transformer for extracting predictive latent topics from financial disclosures.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Interpretable multimodal reasoning for robo-advisory: the FinErva framework.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 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
Introduction: The intersection of big data analytics and financial risk management has spurred significant methodological innovation and organizational change. Despite growing research activity, the literature remains fragmented, with notable gaps in comparative effectiveness, cross-sectoral applicability, and the use of non-traditional data sources. Methods: Following the PRISMA 2020 protocol, a systematic review was conducted on 21 peer-reviewed studies published between 2016 and June 2025. The review evaluated the methodological diversity and effectiveness of machine learning and hybrid approaches in financial risk management. Results: The analysis mapped the relative strengths and limitations of neural networks, ensemble learning, fuzzy logic, and hybrid optimization across credit, fraud, systemic, and operational risk. Advanced machine learning techniques consistently demonstrated strong predictive accuracy, yet real-world deployment remained geographically concentrated, primarily in Chinese and European banking and fintech sectors. Applications involving alternative and unstructured data, such as IoT signals and behavioral analytics, were largely experimental and faced both technical and governance challenges. Discussion/conclusion: The findings underscore the scarcity of systematic benchmarking across risk types and organizational contexts, as well as the limited attention to explainability in current implementations. This review identifies an urgent need for comparative, cross-jurisdictional studies, stronger field validation, and open science practices to bridge the gap between technical advances and their operational impact in big data-enabled financial risk management.
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.