I know this is probably not what you're looking for, but there is a lot to be said for good governance around naming fields and forms.
When we were tackling this, it was part of a broader initiative, where we:
1) named all our fields and forms based on which Org was using them. You can do whatever, but for us, it was appending a 3 character governance code to the front of each field. Think "MKT Due Date" instead of "Due Date"
The immediate result of this is that your fieldname in your audit page informs you which workflows are auditing their fields. Additionally if there was an egregious use (any team tracking all the fields on their form), we'd immediately know to question it.
2) auditing and retiring our forms and fields. There are a few different options for this, like fusion, or Doug den Hoed's apps, but the basic concept is that if you know something isn't being used, see if you can retire or outright delete it. When I retired a form, I would look at all the fields in the form, and if they were only being used ON that one form, I would append it with a ZZZ (retire that one field since it's only being used on a retired form).
The result of this, was reduced number of fields in the audit page and a short list of ZZZ fields I could understand, question and potentially delete or stop auditing.
Both these actions, resulted in a much shorter list of fields on the audit page, as well as a general plan of attack, e.g. "I see the SEO team is tracking 100 fields, I think I'm going to have a chat with them today"
