ReviewToxics2025
Mapping the Rise in Machine Learning in Environmental Chemical Research: A Bibliometric Analysis.
Review in Toxics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Machine learning (ML) is reshaping how environmental chemicals are monitored and how their hazards are evaluated for human health. Here, we mapped this landscape by analyzing 3150 peer-reviewed articles (1985-2025) from the Web of Science Core Collection. Co-citation, co-occurrence, and temporal trend analyses in VOSviewer and R reveal an exponential publication surge from 2015, dominated by environmental science journals, with China and the United States leading in output. Eight thematic clusters emerged, centered on ML model development, water quality prediction, quantitative structure-activity applications, and per-/polyfluoroalkyl substances, with XGBoost and random forests as the most cited algorithms. A distinct risk assessment cluster indicates migration of these tools toward dose-response and regulatory applications, yet keyword frequencies show a 4:1 bias toward environmental endpoints over human health endpoints. Emerging topics include climate change, microplastics, and digital soil mapping, while lignin, arsenic, and phthalates appear as fast-growing but understudied chemicals. Our findings expose gaps in chemical coverage and health integration. We recommend expanding the substance portfolio, systematically coupling ML outputs with human health data, adopting explainable artificial intelligence workflows, and fostering international collaboration to translate ML advances into actionable chemical risk assessments.
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.