Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39172772›Full record

ReviewPLOS digital health2024

Applied artificial intelligence for global child health: Addressing biases and barriers.

Vijaytha Muralidharan, Joel Schamroth, Alaa Youssef, Leo A Celi, Roxana Daneshjou

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PLOS digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Explainable AI: Ethical Frameworks, Bias, and the Necessity for Benchmarks.European journal of pediatric surgery : official journal of Austrian Association of Pediatric Surgery ... [et al] = Zeitschrift fur Kinderchirurgie · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Pediatrics 4.0: the Transformative Impacts of the Latest Industrial Revolution on Pediatrics.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2025
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Vijaytha MuralidharanDepartment of Dermatology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0226-8468
Joel SchamrothFaculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-4565-2333
Alaa YoussefStanford Center for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Imaging, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
Leo A CeliLaboratory for Computational Physiology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Roxana DaneshjouDepartment of Dermatology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given the potential benefits of artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) within healthcare, it is critical to consider how these technologies can be deployed in pediatric research and practice. Currently, healthcare AI/ML has not yet adapted to the specific technical considerations related to pediatric data nor adequately addressed the specific vulnerabilities of children and young people (CYP) in relation to AI. While the greatest burden of disease in CYP is firmly concentrated in lower and middle-income countries (LMICs), existing applied pediatric AI/ML efforts are concentrated in a small number of high-income countries (HICs). In LMICs, use-cases remain primarily in the proof-of-concept stage. This narrative review identifies a number of intersecting challenges that pose barriers to effective AI/ML for CYP globally and explores the shifts needed to make progress across multiple domains. Child-specific technical considerations throughout the AI/ML lifecycle have been largely overlooked thus far, yet these can be critical to model effectiveness. Governance concerns are paramount, with suitable national and international frameworks and guidance required to enable the safe and responsible deployment of advanced technologies impacting the care of CYP and using their data. An ambitious vision for child health demands that the potential benefits of AI/Ml are realized universally through greater international collaboration, capacity building, strong oversight, and ultimately diffusing the AI/ML locus of power to empower researchers and clinicians globally. In order that AI/ML systems that do not exacerbate inequalities in pediatric care, teams researching and developing these technologies in LMICs must ensure that AI/ML research is inclusive of the needs and concerns of CYP and their caregivers. A broad, interdisciplinary, and human-centered approach to AI/ML is essential for developing tools for healthcare workers delivering care, such that the creation and deployment of ML is grounded in local systems, cultures, and clinical practice. Decisions to invest in developing and testing pediatric AI/ML in resource-constrained settings must always be part of a broader evaluation of the overall needs of a healthcare system, considering the critical building blocks underpinning effective, sustainable, and cost-efficient healthcare delivery for CYP.

Identifiers

PMID39172772
PMCPMC11340888

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.