ArticleScientific reports2026
Exploring a comprehensive knowledge map for bridge management research: a Delphi-enhanced scientometric analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
Bridge infrastructure worldwide is aging, while demands for safety, sustainability, and cost-efficiency intensify challenges in bridge management (BM). This study develops a comprehensive knowledge map of BM through scientometric analysis, clarifying its intellectual structure, technological frontiers, and emerging themes. Using CiteSpace, 1582 peer-reviewed articles (2003-2024) from the Web of Science Core Collection were analyzed, with keywords and gaps refined via a Delphi process involving five senior experts. Scientometric techniques-including co-citation, cluster mapping, citation bursts, and keyword time-zone analysis-were employed to trace field evolution. Results reveal three stages: exploratory (2003-2009), steady growth (2010-2016), and digital transformation (2017-2024). Ten thematic clusters emerged, spanning intelligent management, hybrid decision-making, inspection technologies, and life-cycle sustainability. Research hotspots highlight digital twins, machine learning, condition assessment, and structural health monitoring. Five evidence-informed future priorities were identified: integrated AI-driven frameworks, hybrid decision models, network-level inspection planning, sustainability-oriented life-cycle assessment, and robust resilience modeling. Co-authorship and institutional collaboration networks further reveal global hubs shaping BM knowledge exchange. This study provides an updated mapping of BM, offering a structured agenda that links quantitative evidence with practical directions for advancing intelligent, sustainable, and risk-resilient BM.
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.