A bibliometric analysis of artificial intelligence in ovarian cancer research from 2006 to 2025

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer is a gynecological malignancy associated with high mortality and poses significant clinical challenges in early diagnosis and precision treatment. Although the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) has introduced novel approaches to this field, a comprehensive bibliometric overview remains lacking. This study aims to fill this gap by providing a systematic bibliometric analysis of this rapidly evolving domain. METHODS: In this study, the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) was used to retrieve literature on AI applications in ovarian cancer research published from 2006 to the search date (November 19, 2025). Using CiteSpace and VOSviewer, we conducted visual and quantitative analyses of publication trends, countries/regions, institutions, authors, journals, highly cited papers, and keywords. RESULTS: A total of 786 publications were included in the analysis. The annual publication output showed pronounced exponential growth, with a marked acceleration after 2019. China, the United States, and the United Kingdom were the leading contributing countries. Research hotspots centered on AI-assisted diagnosis, prognostic prediction models, radiomics, and biomarker discovery. The evolution of keywords indicated that frontier research has shifted from basic classification toward more advanced areas, including high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma, multimodal learning, and explainable AI. CONCLUSION: Research on AI in ovarian cancer has progressed rapidly, with international collaboration concentrated among leading contributors such as China, the USA, and the UK. Future efforts should prioritize the development of explainable and robust clinical AI systems, deeper integration of multimodal data, closer collaboration between clinicians and AI researchers, and high-quality data sharing to facilitate the translation of research findings into precise clinical practice.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.