ReviewMedicine2023
Global research trends in artificial intelligence for critical care with a focus on chord network charts: Bibliometric analysis.
Review in Medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unveiling the conceptual and intellectual map of care bundle research in ICUs: Trends, key issues, and collaborative networks.Nursing in critical care · 2025Article
- Analyzing collaboration and impact: A bibliometric review of four highly published authors' research profiles on collaborative maps.Medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe field of critical care-related artificial intelligence (AI) research is rapidly gaining interest. However, there is still a lack of comprehensive bibliometric studies that measure and analyze scientific publications on a global scale. Network charts have traditionally been used to highlight author collaborations and coword phenomena (ACCP). It is necessary to determine whether chord network charts (CNCs) can provide a better understanding of ACCP, thus requiring clarification. This study aimed to achieve 2 objectives: evaluate global research trends in AI in intensive care medicine on publication outputs, coauthorships between nations, citations, and co-occurrences of keywords; and demonstrate the use of CNCs for ACCP in bibliometric analysis.
methodsThe web of science database was searched for a total of 1992 documents published between 2013 and 2022. The document type was limited to articles and article reviews, and titles and abstracts were screened for eligibility. The characteristics of the publications, including preferred journals, leading research countries, international collaborations, top institutions, and major keywords, were analyzed using the category-journal rank-authorship-L-index score and trend analysis. The 100 most highly cited articles are also listed in detail.
resultsBetween 2018 and 2022, there was a sharp increase in publications, which accounted for 92.8% (1849/1992) of all papers included in the study. The United States and China were responsible for nearly 50% (936/1992) of the total publications. The leading countries, institutes, departments, authors, and journals in terms of publications were the US, Massachusetts Gen Hosp (US), Medical School, Zhongheng Zhang (China), and Science Reports. The top 3 primary keywords denoting research hotspots for AI in critically ill patients were mortality, model, and intensive care unit, with mortality having the highest burst strength (4.49). The keywords risk and system showed the highest growth trend (0.98) in counts over the past 4 years.
conclusionsThis study provides valuable insights into the potential for ACCP and future research opportunities. For AI-based clinical research to become widely accepted in critical care practice, collaborative research efforts are necessary to strengthen the maturity and robustness of AI-driven models using CNCs for display.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.