A comparative quantitative study of utilizing artificial intelligence on electronic health records in the USA and China during 2008-2017

BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2018 Dec 7;18(Suppl 5):117. doi: 10.1186/s12911-018-0692-9.

Abstract

Background: The application of artificial intelligence techniques for processing electronic health records data plays increasingly significant role in advancing clinical decision support. This study conducts a quantitative comparison on the research of utilizing artificial intelligence on electronic health records between the USA and China to discovery their research similarities and differences.

Methods: Publications from both Web of Science and PubMed are retrieved to explore the research status and academic performances of the two countries quantitatively. Bibliometrics, geographic visualization, collaboration degree calculation, social network analysis, latent dirichlet allocation, and affinity propagation clustering are applied to analyze research quantity, collaboration relations, and hot research topics.

Results: There are 1031 publications from the USA and 173 publications from China during 2008-2017 period. The annual numbers of publications from the USA and China increase polynomially. JAMIA with 135 publications and JBI with 13 publications are the top prolific journals for the USA and China, respectively. Harvard University with 101 publications and Zhejiang University with 12 publications are the top prolific affiliations for the USA and China, respectively. Massachusetts is the most prolific region with 211 publications for the USA, while for China, Taiwan is the top 1 with 47 publications. China has relatively higher institutional and international collaborations. Nine main research areas for the USA are identified, differentiating 7 for China.

Conclusions: There is a steadily growing presence and increasing visibility of utilizing artificial intelligence on electronic health records for the USA and China over the years. The results of the study demonstrate the research similarities and differences, as well as strengths and weaknesses of the two countries.

Keywords: Artificial intelligence; Bibliometrics; China; Electronic health records; Topic modelling; United States.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study

MeSH terms

  • Artificial Intelligence* / statistics & numerical data
  • Bibliometrics*
  • China
  • Electronic Health Records* / statistics & numerical data
  • Humans
  • Information Storage and Retrieval* / statistics & numerical data
  • PubMed* / statistics & numerical data
  • Taiwan
  • United States