SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2026
Research on machine learning-based clinical prediction models: a bibliometric analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: Machine learning (ML) has emerged as a transformative approach for developing high-performance clinical prediction models (CPMs). By leveraging multidimensional patient data, ML enables more accurate disease risk stratification, prognostic assessment, and clinical decision-making. In recent years, research on CPMs has expanded rapidly, with nearly 250,000 publications indexed as of 2024. Despite this remarkable growth, a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of the field is currently lacking. Objective: This study aimed to analyze the global research status, evolutionary trends, and thematic hotspots of machine learning-based clinical prediction models (ML-CPMs) through bibliometric and visualization techniques. Methods: Publications related to ML-CPMs were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection and the Scopus database (up to May 9, 2025). Bibliometric analyses were performed using various tools, including R, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace, to generate annual publication trends, collaboration networks, and journal distributions, as well as co-citation, clustering, and keyword analyses. Results: A total of 8,619 publications (8,000 original articles and 619 reviews) from 118 countries were identified. Since 2015, annual publications have grown exponentially ( Conclusion: Research on ML-CPMs has experienced rapid global growth over the past decade, forming extensive international collaboration networks. However, challenges such as limited interpretability, data heterogeneity, and privacy concerns persist. Future studies should prioritize external validation, clinical applicability, and the integration of human-AI collaborative decision-making to ensure robust implementation in real-world clinical settings.
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.