MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412587150 · doi:10.2196/72616

Artificial Intelligence in Diabetic Kidney Disease Research: Bibliometric Analysis From 2006 to 2024

2025· article· en· W4412587150 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xingyuan Li, Liming XIao

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Diabetes · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintMedicineComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is a major complication of diabetes and the leading cause of end-stage renal disease globally. Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies have shown increasing potential in DKD research for early detection, risk prediction, and disease management. However, the landscape of AI applications in this field remains incompletely mapped, especially in terms of collaboration networks, thematic evolution, and clinical translation. Objective: This study aims to perform a comprehensive bibliometric and translational analysis of AI-related DKD research published between 2006 and 2024, identifying publication trends, research hotspots, key contributors, collaboration patterns, and the extent of clinical validation and explainability. Methods: A systematic search of the Web of Science Core Collection was conducted to identify English-language original articles applying AI technologies to DKD. Articles were screened following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 guidelines. Bibliometric visualization was performed using CiteSpace and VOSviewer to assess coauthorship, institutional and country collaboration, keyword evolution, and citation bursts. A qualitative review was conducted to evaluate clinical validation, model explainability, and real-world implementation. Results: Out of 1158 retrieved records, 384 studies met the inclusion criteria. Global publications on AI in DKD increased rapidly after 2019. China led in publication volume, followed by the United States, India, and Iran. Keyword analysis showed a thematic transition from early biomarker and proteomic research to deep learning, clinical prediction models, and management tools. Despite methodological advances, few studies included external validation or explainability frameworks. Notable translational efforts included DeepMind's acute kidney injury predictor and a chronic kidney disease prediction model developed by Sumit, yet widespread real-world integration remains limited. Conclusions: AI research in DKD has grown substantially over the past 2 decades, with expanding international collaboration and diversification of research themes. However, challenges persist in clinical applicability, model transparency, and global inclusivity. Future research should prioritize explainable AI, multicenter validation, and integration into clinical workflows to support effective translation of AI innovations into DKD care.

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

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0930.234
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.334 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR DiabetesSame topicChronic Kidney Disease and DiabetesFrench-language works237,207