Emergence and Evolution of Big Data Science in HIV Research: Bibliometric Analysis of Federally Sponsored Studies 2000-2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The rapid growth of inherently complex and heterogeneous data in HIV/AIDS research underscores the importance of Big Data Science. Recently, there have been increasing uptakes of Big Data techniques in basic, clinical, and public health fields of HIV/AIDS research. However, no studies have systematically elaborated on the evolving applications of Big Data in HIV/AIDS research. We sought to explore the emergence and evolution of Big Data Science in HIV/AIDS-related publications that were funded by the US federal agencies. Methods We identified HIV/AIDS and Big Data related publications that were funded by seven federal agencies from 2000 to 2019 by integrating data from National Institutes of Health (NIH) ExPORTER, MEDLINE, and MeSH. Building on bibliometrics and Natural Language Processing (NLP) methods, we constructed co-occurrence networks using bibliographic metadata (e.g., countries, institutes, MeSH terms, and keywords) of the retrieved publications. We then detected clusters among the networks as well as the temporal dynamics of clusters, followed by expert evaluation and clinical implications. Results We harnessed nearly 600 thousand publications related to HIV/AIDS, of which 19,528 publications relating to Big Data were included in bibliometric analysis. Results showed that (1) the number of Big Data publications has been increasing since 2000, (2) US institutes have been in close collaborations with China, Canada, and Germany, (3) some institutes (e.g., University of California system, MD Anderson Cancer Center, and Harvard Medical School) are among the most productive institutes and started using Big Data in HIV/AIDS research early, (4) Big Data research was not active in public health disciplines until 2015, (5) research topics such as genomics, HIV comorbidities, population-based studies, Electronic Health Records (EHR), social media, precision medicine, and methodologies such as machine learning, Deep Learning, radiomics, and data mining emerge quickly in recent years. Conclusions We identified a rapid growth in the cross-disciplinary research of HIV/AIDS and Big Data over the past two decades. Our findings demonstrated patterns and trends of prevailing research topics and Big Data applications in HIV/AIDS research and suggested a number of fast-evolving areas of Big Data Science in HIV/AIDS research including secondary analysis of EHR, machine learning, Deep Learning, predictive analysis, and NLP.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | high |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.109 | 0.227 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".