ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Artificial intelligence driven transformation of pediatric eye health education based on bibliometric analysis and a cross-sectional survey.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pediatric eye diseases, especially myopia and other refractive errors as well as binocular vision disorders, have evolved into a pressing global public health concern. Effective caregiver-targeted eye health education is crucial for the early prevention and long-term management of these conditions. However, conventional educational approaches often struggle to deliver actionable and accessible guidance. Emerging artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, particularly large language models (LLMs), present novel opportunities to address this gap. Methods: A mixed-methods design was conducted in this study. On one hand, a bibliometric analysis was conducted on publications related to pediatric eye health education from 2015 to 2025, using the Web of Science Core Collection and PubMed databases, with visualization implemented via Bibliometrix and CiteSpace software. On the other hand, a cross-sectional online questionnaire survey was administered to guardians of children aged 1-6 years to systematically assess their key concerns about pediatric eye diseases, knowledge levels, information sources, and preferences for educational formats. Results: A total of 111 publications were included in the bibliometric analysis, which revealed a significant surge in research output after 2020. Traditional themes such as vision screening and patient education remained central, while AI- and LLM-related topics have emerged as recent research hotspots. China and the United States led in terms of publication volume, whereas several countries with lower output demonstrated higher average citation impact. Among 328 valid survey responses, guardians showed high concern for myopia, astigmatism, and strabismus but lacked sufficient practical knowledge regarding preventive pharmacological strategies and correct eye drop administration. Additionally, child-friendly, visualized, interactive, and online educational formats were strongly preferred. Conclusion: By integrating bibliometric trends with the actual needs of caregivers, this study demonstrates that the growing role of AI and LLMs in pediatric eye health education reflects both technological advancement and unmet demands for personalized, actionable educational content. These findings provide an evidence-based foundation for the development of AI-driven pediatric eye health education tools, emphasizing the necessity of clinical oversight, ethical governance, and equitable access in future practice.
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.