ArticleDigital health
Artificial intelligence for cardiac arrest in the digital health era: From algorithmic performance to workflow-integrated, outcome-oriented digital health systems.
Article in Digital health. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To characterize the global research landscape, collaboration patterns, and thematic evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) in cardiac arrest care. Methods: We conducted a bibliometric analysis of AI and cardiac arrest research using the Web of Science Core Collection and Scopus. We retrieved records on October 29, 2025, limited to English-language articles and reviews. After deduplication, 1,228 publications were included. CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and bibliometrix (R) assessed publication growth, country/institution contributions, collaboration networks, co-citation structures, and keyword dynamics. Results: We included 1,228 publications (2012-2025) with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 22.05%. The corpus comprised 6,994 authors (mean of 7.46 per paper), and international co-authorship accounted for 13.36% of all documents. Forty-eight countries contributed, with the United States leading (134 publications; 10.9%), followed by South Korea (101) and China (77). Seoul National University was the most productive institution (92), followed by Harvard University (60). Aramendi E. ranked first among authors (21), followed by Park J. (17) and Ong M.E.H. (16). Resuscitation ranked first among journals, with 54 publications and 1,350 citations. Keywords shifted from method-focused topics to more clinical, system- and outcome-focused themes. Burst and clustering analyses emphasized early warning/prediction and neurological outcomes, with recent burst terms including "Cerebral Performance Category (CPC)," "brain injury," and "emergency medical services (EMS)." Conclusions: AI-cardiac arrest research is entering a maturing expansion phase characterized by interdisciplinary linkages and a multipolar collaboration structure. The field is shifting beyond algorithmic performance toward transportable, workflow-aware, and outcome-oriented digital health systems.
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.