Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35712463›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2022

Gaps and Opportunities of Artificial Intelligence Applications for Pediatric Oncology in European Research: A Systematic Review of Reviews and a Bibliometric Analysis.

Alberto Eugenio Tozzi, Francesco Fabozzi, Megan Eckley, Ileana Croci, Vito Andrea Dell'Anna, Erica Colantonio, Angela Mastronuzzi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Process mining in healthcare: a tertiary study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Pediatrics 4.0: the Transformative Impacts of the Latest Industrial Revolution on Pediatrics.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Alberto Eugenio TozziMultifactorial and Complex Diseases Research Area, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital, Istituto di Ricerca e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Rome, Italy.
Francesco FabozziDepartment of Onco Hematology and Cell and Gene Therapy, Bambino Gesù Pediatric Hospital, Istituto di Ricerca e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Rome, Italy.
Megan EckleyDepartment of Onco Hematology and Cell and Gene Therapy, Bambino Gesù Pediatric Hospital, Istituto di Ricerca e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Rome, Italy.
Ileana CrociMultifactorial and Complex Diseases Research Area, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital, Istituto di Ricerca e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Rome, Italy.
Vito Andrea Dell'AnnaDepartment of Onco Hematology and Cell and Gene Therapy, Bambino Gesù Pediatric Hospital, Istituto di Ricerca e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Rome, Italy.
Erica ColantonioDepartment of Onco Hematology and Cell and Gene Therapy, Bambino Gesù Pediatric Hospital, Istituto di Ricerca e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Rome, Italy.
Angela MastronuzziDepartment of Onco Hematology and Cell and Gene Therapy, Bambino Gesù Pediatric Hospital, Istituto di Ricerca e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The application of artificial intelligence (AI) systems is emerging in many fields in recent years, due to the increased computing power available at lower cost. Although its applications in various branches of medicine, such as pediatric oncology, are many and promising, its use is still in an embryonic stage. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the state of the art regarding the AI application in pediatric oncology, through a systematic review of systematic reviews, and to analyze current trends in Europe, through a bibliometric analysis of publications written by European authors. Among 330 records found, 25 were included in the systematic review. All papers have been published since 2017, demonstrating only recent attention to this field. The total number of studies included in the selected reviews was 674, with a third including an author with a European affiliation. In bibliometric analysis, 304 out of the 978 records found were included. Similarly, the number of publications began to dramatically increase from 2017. Most explored AI applications regard the use of diagnostic images, particularly radiomics, as well as the group of neoplasms most involved are the central nervous system tumors. No evidence was found regarding the use of AI for process mining, clinical pathway modeling, or computer interpreted guidelines to improve the healthcare process. No robust evidence is yet available in any of the domains investigated by systematic reviews. However, the scientific production in Europe is significant and consistent with the topics covered in systematic reviews at the global level. The use of AI in pediatric oncology is developing rapidly with promising results, but numerous gaps and challenges persist to validate its utilization in clinical practice. An important limitation is the need for large datasets for training algorithms, calling for international collaborative studies.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencechildhood cancerCNS tumorsdeep learningmachine learningpediatric oncology

Identifiers

PMID35712463
PMCPMC9194810

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.