Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40061376›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025

A bibliometric analysis of the advance of artificial intelligence in medicine.

Mian Lin, Lingzhi Lin, Lingling Lin, Zhengqiu Lin, Xiaoxiao Yan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Bibliometric analysis of research on artificial İntelligence applications in breast cancer diagnosis.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. 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

5 authors.

Mian Lin *Department of Orthopedics, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, China.
Lingzhi Lin *Department of Orthopedics, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, China.
Lingling LinDepartment of Neurology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, China.
Zhengqiu LinDepartment of Orthopedics, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, China.
Xiaoxiao YanDepartment of Neurology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into medicine has ushered an era of unprecedented innovation, with substantial impacts on healthcare delivery and patient outcomes. Understanding the current development, primary research focuses, and key contributors in AI applications in medicine through bibliometric analysis is essential. Methods: For this research, we utilized the Web of Science Core Collection as our main database and performed a review of literature covering the period from January 2019 to December 2023. VOSviewer and R-bibliometrix were performed to conduct bibliometric analysis and network visualization, including the number of publications, countries, journals, citations, authors, and keywords. Results: A total of 1,811 publications on research for AI in medicine were released across 565 journals by 12,376 authors affiliated with 3,583 institutions from 97 countries. The United States became the foremost producer of scholarly works, significantly impacting the field. Harvard Medical School exhibited the highest publication count among all institutions. The Journal of Medical Internet Research achieved the highest H-index (19), publication count (76), and total citations (1,495). Four keyword clusters were identified, covering AI applications in digital health, COVID-19 and ChatGPT, precision medicine, and public health epidemiology. "Outcomes" and "Risk" demonstrated a notable upward trend, indicating the utilization of AI in engaging with clinicians and patients to discuss patients' health condition risks, foreshadowing future research focal points. Conclusion: Analyzing our bibliometric data allowed us to identify progress, focus areas, and emerging fields in AI for medicine, pointing to potential future research directions. Since 2019, there has been a steady rise in publications related to AI in medicine, indicating its rapid growth. In addition, we reviewed journals and significant publications to pinpoint prominent countries, institutions, and academics. Researchers will gain important insights into the current landscape, collaborative frameworks, and key research topics in the field from this study. The findings suggest directions for future research.

Indexed as

applicationsartificial intelligencebibliometricsmedicineVOSviewer

Identifiers

PMID40061376
PMCPMC11885233

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.