| Literature DB >> 31362340 |
Bach Xuan Tran1,2, Carl A Latkin3, Giang Thu Vu4, Huong Lan Thi Nguyen5, Son Nghiem6, Ming-Xuan Tan7, Zhi-Kai Lim7, Cyrus S H Ho8, Roger C M Ho7,9,10.
Abstract
The applications of artificial intelligence (AI) in aiding clinical decision-making and management of stroke and heart diseases have become increasingly common in recent years, thanks in part to technological advancements and the heightened interest of the research and medical community. This study aims to provide a comprehensive picture of global trends and developments of AI applications relating to stroke and heart diseases, identifying research gaps and suggesting future directions for research and policy-making. A novel analysis approach that combined bibliometrics analysis with a more complex analysis of abstract content using exploratory factor analysis and Latent Dirichlet allocation, which uncovered emerging research domains and topics, was adopted. Data were extracted from the Web of Science database. Results showed topics with the most compelling growth to be AI for big data analysis, robotic prosthesis, robotics-assisted stroke rehabilitation, and minimally invasive surgery. The study also found an emerging landscape of research that was centered on population-specific and early detection of stroke and heart disease. Application of AI in health behavior tracking and improvement as well as the use of robotics in medical diagnostics and prognostication have also been found to attract significant research attention. In light of these findings, it is suggested that the currently under-researched issues of data management, AI model reliability, as well as validation of its clinical utility, need to be further explored in future research and policy decisions to maximize the benefits of AI applications in stroke and heart diseases.Entities:
Keywords: artificial intelligence; bibliometrics; cerebrovascular; heart diseases; scientometrics
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31362340 PMCID: PMC6696240 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16152699
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Paper selection process.
Analytical techniques and outcomes of each data type.
| Type of Data | Unit of Analysis | Analytical Methods | Presentations of Results |
|---|---|---|---|
| Keywords, Countries | Words | Frequency of co-occurrence | Map of keywords clusters |
| Abstracts | Words | Exploratory factors analyses | Top 50 constructed research domains |
| Abstracts | Papers | Latent Dirichlet allocation | 10 classifications of research topics |
| WoS classification of research areas | WoS research areas | Haberman distance | Dendrogram of research disciplines |
General characteristics of publications.
| Year Published | Total Number of Papers | Total Citations | Mean Cite Rate per Year | Total Usage in the Last 6 Months | Total Usage in the Last 5 Years | Mean Use Rate in the Last 6 Months | Mean Use Rate in the Last 5 Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 358 | 345 | 0.96 | 1968 | 3289 | 5.50 | 1.84 |
| 2017 | 273 | 1571 | 2.88 | 903 | 4139 | 3.31 | 3.03 |
| 2016 | 157 | 1149 | 2.44 | 287 | 2542 | 1.83 | 3.24 |
| 2015 | 152 | 1720 | 2.83 | 196 | 2424 | 1.29 | 3.19 |
| 2014 | 131 | 1884 | 2.88 | 136 | 2193 | 1.04 | 3.35 |
| 2013 | 100 | 1725 | 2.88 | 75 | 1819 | 0.75 | 3.64 |
| 2012 | 80 | 1903 | 3.40 | 85 | 1480 | 1.06 | 3.70 |
| 2011 | 91 | 3086 | 4.24 | 128 | 1724 | 1.41 | 3.79 |
| 2010 | 64 | 1827 | 3.17 | 42 | 708 | 0.66 | 2.21 |
| 2009 | 54 | 2481 | 4.59 | 58 | 859 | 1.07 | 3.18 |
| 2008 | 44 | 1751 | 3.62 | 32 | 483 | 0.73 | 2.20 |
| 2007 | 39 | 2032 | 4.34 | 25 | 438 | 0.64 | 2.25 |
| 2006 | 39 | 1956 | 3.86 | 33 | 503 | 0.85 | 2.58 |
| 2005 | 15 | 694 | 3.30 | 10 | 136 | 0.67 | 1.81 |
| 2004 | 23 | 650 | 1.88 | 6 | 75 | 0.26 | 0.65 |
| 2003 | 21 | 1373 | 4.09 | 20 | 222 | 0.95 | 2.11 |
| 2002 | 13 | 243 | 1.10 | 5 | 27 | 0.38 | 0.42 |
| 2001 | 8 | 304 | 2.11 | 3 | 39 | 0.38 | 0.98 |
| 2000 | 8 | 672 | 4.42 | 9 | 89 | 1.13 | 2.23 |
| 1999 | 8 | 494 | 3.09 | 4 | 65 | 0.50 | 1.63 |
| 1998 | 3 | 26 | 0.41 | 1 | 1 | 0.33 | 0.07 |
| 1997 | 8 | 926 | 5.26 | 13 | 122 | 1.63 | 3.05 |
| 1995 | 3 | 25 | 0.35 | 0 | 3 | 0.00 | 0.20 |
| 1994 | 2 | 51 | 1.02 | 0 | 2 | 0.00 | 0.20 |
| 1993 | 3 | 51 | 0.65 | 0 | 2 | 0.00 | 0.13 |
| 1992 | 1 | 10 | 0.37 | 0 | 1 | 0.00 | 0.20 |
| 1991 | 2 | 4 | 0.07 | 0 | 2 | 0.00 | 0.20 |
Number of papers by countries as study settings.
| No. | Country Settings | Frequency | % | No. | Country | Frequency | % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States | 108 | 44.1% | 19 | Czech | 2 | 0.8% |
| 2 | Ireland | 25 | 10.2% | 20 | France | 2 | 0.8% |
| 3 | Italy | 15 | 6.1% | 21 | Netherlands | 2 | 0.8% |
| 4 | India | 14 | 5.7% | 22 | Singapore | 2 | 0.8% |
| 5 | Australia | 9 | 3.7% | 23 | United Arab Emirates | 2 | 0.8% |
| 6 | Japan | 8 | 3.3% | 24 | Antarctica | 1 | 0.4% |
| 7 | Taiwan | 6 | 2.4% | 25 | Brazil | 1 | 0.4% |
| 8 | Spain | 5 | 2.0% | 26 | Bulgaria | 1 | 0.4% |
| 9 | United Kingdom | 5 | 2.0% | 27 | Egypt | 1 | 0.4% |
| 10 | Germany | 4 | 1.6% | 28 | Greece | 1 | 0.4% |
| 11 | Israel | 4 | 1.6% | 29 | Jordan | 1 | 0.4% |
| 12 | Switzerland | 4 | 1.6% | 30 | Malaysia | 1 | 0.4% |
| 13 | Iran | 3 | 1.2% | 31 | Mexico | 1 | 0.4% |
| 14 | Poland | 3 | 1.2% | 32 | New Zealand | 1 | 0.4% |
| 15 | Saudi Arabia | 3 | 1.2% | 33 | Pakistan | 1 | 0.4% |
| 16 | Austria | 2 | 0.8% | 34 | Sweden | 1 | 0.4% |
| 17 | Canada | 2 | 0.8% | 35 | Tunisia | 1 | 0.4% |
| 18 | China | 2 | 0.8% | 36 | Turkey | 1 | 0.4% |
Figure 2Co-occurrence of the most frequent author’s keywords. Note: the colors of the nodes indicate principle components of the data structure; node size was scaled to keyword occurrences; the thickness of the lines was drawn based on the strength of the association between two keywords. (ANN: artificial neural network; EEG: electroencephalogram; HRV: heart rate variability; MRI: magnetic resonance imaging; SVM: support vector machine).
Top 50 research domains that emerged from the exploratory factor analysis of all abstract content.
| No. | Name | Keywords | Eigen-Value | Freq. | % of Cases |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fugl-Meyer; upper | Fugl; meyer; upper; motor; rehabilitation; Fugl-Meyer (FMA); limb; extremity; impairment; arm; reaching; improvements; weeks; therapy; stroke | 19.3 | 758 | 53.8% |
| 2 | Support vector; machine (SVM) | Vector; svm; support; feature; classification; machine; heart rate variability (HRV) | 6.8 | 385 | 48.8% |
| 3 | Coronary artery bypass; surgery | Bypass; surgery; postoperative; endoscopic; surgical; invasive; procedures; left; underwent; coronary; times | 4.8 | 273 | 33.3% |
| 4 | Blood pressure (BP) | Pressure; blood; bp; tilt | 3.8 | 63 | 10.8% |
| 5 | Flexion; joint | Flexion; joint; elbow; passive; motion; movements; healthy; range | 3.4 | 244 | 34.1% |
| 6 | Neural network | Neural; artificial; network; artificial neural network (ANN); networks | 3.3 | 256 | 27.8% |
| 7 | Predict | Area under the curve (AUC); Rheumatoid factor (RF); random; predicting; predictive; predict | 3.2 | 134 | 22.6% |
| 8 | Gait; walking | Gait; walking; lokomat; practice; phase; training | 3.0 | 192 | 33.1% |
| 9 | Machine learning; heart disease | Machine; learning; disease; accuracy; classification; prediction; risk; heart | 2.9 | 811 | 72.7% |
| 10 | Fuzzy; systems | Fuzzy; systems; expert; decision; problem; medical | 2.8 | 224 | 39.1% |
| 11 | Sensitivity | Sensitivity; specificity; detection; predictive | 2.6 | 137 | 21.3% |
| 12 | Mitral valve; repair | Valve; mitral; repair; underwent | 2.5 | 62 | 10.0% |
| 13 | Brain; hand | Brain; hand; stimulation; plasticity; movements; functional; brain-computer interfaces (BCI) | 2.5 | 197 | 29.4% |
| 14 | Randomized controlled; assisted | Controlled; randomized; assisted; conventional; improvement; functional; efficacy; treatment | 2.4 | 386 | 49.9% |
| 15 | Assistance; finger | Assistance; finger; virtual; demonstrated; activities | 2.4 | 106 | 19.7% |
| 16 | Image | Images; image; computed tomography (CT); deep | 2.4 | 58 | 10.2% |
| 17 | Observed; effects | Observed; effects; week; post | 2.3 | 129 | 23.4% |
| 18 | Sensor; healthcare | Sensor; healthcare; monitoring; framework | 2.1 | 73 | 15.5% |
| 19 | Complications; respiratory | Complications; respiratory; cardiac | 2.1 | 88 | 17.6% |
| 20 | Exercise; subjects | Exercise; subjects; peak; tilt | 2.1 | 106 | 22.3% |
| 21 | State; applied | State; applied; field | 2.1 | 104 | 21.5% |
| 22 | Atrial | Atrial; atrial fibrillation (AF); catheter; procedure | 2.0 | 61 | 11.3% |
| 23 | Paper | Paper; presents; proposed; experimental | 2.0 | 243 | 39.4% |
| 24 | Space; terms | Space; terms; values | 2.0 | 62 | 13.4% |
| 25 | Coronary artery; carotid | Artery; coronary; carotid; myocardial; disease; risk | 2.0 | 261 | 39.9% |
| 26 | Clinical | Clinical; recent | 2.0 | 160 | 37.5% |
| 27 | Conditions; future | Conditions; future; tested; healthy | 1.9 | 155 | 29.1% |
| 28 | Variables; models | Variables; models; selected; develop; predict | 1.9 | 167 | 30.5% |
| 29 | Physical activity; wearable | Physical; wearable; devices; activity; technology | 1.9 | 185 | 32.0% |
| 30 | Chronic | Chronic; combined; weeks; week | 1.9 | 133 | 23.4% |
| 31 | Able; user | Able; user; process; tested; wearable | 1.8 | 135 | 25.2% |
| 32 | Diabetes; classifier | Diabetes; classifier; ensemble; dataset; classifiers; cancer; problems | 1.8 | 147 | 23.1% |
| 33 | Muscle; guidance | Muscle; guidance | 1.8 | 29 | 6.8% |
| 34 | Parameters | Parameters; error | 1.8 | 72 | 16.8% |
| 35 | Validation | Validation; cancer; lung | 1.8 | 63 | 13.1% |
| 36 | Severe; visual | Severe; visual; feedback | 1.8 | 66 | 13.7% |
| 37 | Mortality; failure | Mortality; failure; outcomes; myocardial; hospital | 1.7 | 179 | 29.9% |
| 38 | Trained; set | Trained; set; sets; validation | 1.7 | 125 | 23.1% |
| 39 | Propose; terms | Propose; terms; show | 1.7 | 101 | 21.5% |
| 40 | End; task | End; task; position; measured | 1.7 | 124 | 24.2% |
| 41 | Robot | Robots; robot; therapy; field; intensity | 1.7 | 213 | 34.1% |
| 42 | Multiple; index | Multiple; index; sleep; events | 1.7 | 92 | 19.4% |
| 43 | Patterns | Patterns; pattern; potential; duration | 1.6 | 119 | 25.5% |
| 44 | Technique; diagnosis | Technique; diagnosis; techniques | 1.6 | 128 | 26.8% |
| 45 | Stroke | Stroke | 1.6 | 168 | 44.1% |
| 46 | Pre; post | Pre; post; effective | 1.6 | 117 | 22.6% |
| 47 | Quality | Quality; life | 1.6 | 70 | 15.0% |
| 48 | Provided; differences | Provided; differences; acute | 1.6 | 86 | 18.6% |
| 49 | Development; role | Development; role; plasticity | 1.6 | 76 | 16.3% |
| 50 | Electrocardiogram (ECG); signals; arrhythmia | Electrocardiogram (ECG); arrhythmia; database; frequency; signals; normal; classifiers; cardiac | 1.6 | 225 | 34.9% |
Figure 3Co-occurrence of the most frequent topics that emerged from the exploratory factor analysis of abstracts contents. (ANN: Artificial Neural Network; AUC: area under the curve; CHD: coronary heart disease; CT: computed tomography; ECG: electrocardiogram; HF: heart failure; HR: heart rate; HRV: heart rate variability; SVM: support vector machine).
Top 10 research topics classified by Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA). AI = artificial intelligence.
| Year | Research Areas | Frequency | Percent |
|---|---|---|---|
| Topic 1 | Reviews of AI and robotics in healthcare | 234 | 15.9% |
| Topic 2 | AI for big data analysis (genetics, metabolic studies) | 217 | 14.8% |
| Topic 3 | Robotically-assisted cardiac surgery | 170 | 11.6% |
| Topic 4 | Robotic prosthesis | 167 | 11.4% |
| Topic 5 | Robotics-assisted stroke rehabilitation | 167 | 11.4% |
| Topic 6 | Minimally invasive surgery | 130 | 8.8% |
| Topic 7 | AI for medical diagnostics | 118 | 8.0% |
| Topic 8 | AI for population identification | 110 | 7.5% |
| Topic 9 | AI-assisted biometric assessment | 90 | 6.1% |
| Topic 10 | AI interpretation of medical investigations | 66 | 4.5% |
Figure 4Changes in applications of AI to stroke and heart disease research during 1991–2018.
Figure 5Dendrogram of research areas using the WoS classifications.