Evidence mapPaperPMID 41236701Full record

ReviewJapanese journal of radiology2026

Artificial superintelligence alignment in healthcare.

Daiju Ueda, Shannon L Walston, Ryo Kurokawa, Tsukasa Saida, Maya Honda, Mami Iima, Tadashi Watabe, Masahiro Yanagawa, Kentaro Nishioka, Keitaro Sofue and 9 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Japanese journal of radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Superintelligence: A Crucial Juncture in the Development of Healthcare Sciences and Public Health.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    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

19 authors.

Daiju UedaDepartment of Artificial Intelligence, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka Metropolitan University, 1-4-3 Asahi-machi, Abeno-ku, Osaka, 545-8585, Japan. ai.labo.ocu@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3878-3616
Shannon L WalstonDepartment of Artificial Intelligence, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka Metropolitan University, 1-4-3 Asahi-machi, Abeno-ku, Osaka, 545-8585, Japan.
Ryo KurokawaDepartment of Radiology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan.
Tsukasa SaidaDepartment of Radiology, University of Tsukuba, 1-1-1 Tennodai, Tsukuba, 305- 8575, Ibaraki, Japan.
Maya HondaPreemptive Medicine and Lifestyle-related Disease Research center, Kyoto University Hospital, 53 Kawahara-cho, Shogoin, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan.
Mami IimaDepartment of Radiology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 65 Tsurumai-cho, Showa-ku, Nagoya, 466-8550, Aichi, Japan.
Tadashi WatabeDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Osaka, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, 565-0871, Osaka, Japan.
Masahiro YanagawaDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Osaka, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, 565-0871, Osaka, Japan.
Kentaro NishiokaRadiation Oncology Division, Global Center for Biomedical Science and Engineering, Faculty of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Nishi 7, Kita 15, Kita-ku, Sapporo, 060-8648, Hokkaido, Japan.
Keitaro SofueDepartment of Radiology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-2, Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan.
Akihiko SakataDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, 54 Shogoin Kawahara-Cho, Sakyo-Ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan.
Shunsuke SugawaraDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1, Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
Mariko KawamuraDepartment of Radiology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 65 Tsurumai-cho, Showa-ku, Nagoya, 466-8550, Aichi, Japan.
Rintaro ItoDepartment of Radiology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 65 Tsurumai-cho, Showa-ku, Nagoya, 466-8550, Aichi, Japan.
Koji TakumiDepartment of Radiology, Kagoshima University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, 8-35-1 Sakuragaoka, Kagoshima, 890-8520, Japan.
Seitaro OdaDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, Faculty of Life Sciences, Kumamoto University, 1-1-1 Honjo, Chuo-ku, Kumamoto, 860-8556, Japan.
Kenji HirataDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Faculty of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Kita 15 Nishi 7, Kita-ku, Sapporo, 060-8648, Hokkaido, Japan.
Satoru IdeDepartment of Radiology, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, 1-1 Iseigaoka, Yahatanishi-ku, Kitakyushu, 807-8555, Japan.
Shinji NaganawaDepartment of Radiology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 65 Tsurumai-cho, Showa-ku, Nagoya, 466-8550, Aichi, Japan.

Funding

Japan Science and Technology Agency JPMJPR2521
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The emergence of Artificial Superintelligence (ASI) in healthcare presents unprecedented opportunities for revolutionizing diagnostics, treatment planning, and population health management, but also introduces critical risks if these systems are not properly aligned with human values and clinical objectives. This review examines the theoretical foundations of ASI and the alignment problem in healthcare contexts, exploring how misaligned Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems could optimize for wrong objectives or pursue harmful strategies leading to patient harm and systemic failures. Current challenges in AI alignment are illustrated through real-world examples from radiology and clinical decision-making, where algorithms have demonstrated concerning biases, generalizability failures, and optimization for inappropriate proxy measures. The paper analyzes key alignment challenges including objective complexity and technical pitfalls, bias and fairness issues in healthcare data, ethical integration concerns involving compassion and patient autonomy, and system-level policy challenges around regulation and liability. Technical alignment strategies are discussed including reinforcement learning from human feedback, interpretability requirements, formal verification methods, and adversarial testing approaches. Normative alignment solutions encompass ethical frameworks, professional standards, patient engagement protocols, and multi-level governance structures spanning institutional, national, and international coordination. The review emphasizes that successful ASI alignment in healthcare requires combining cutting-edge AI research with fundamental medical ethics, noting that while proper alignment could enable transformative health improvements and medical breakthroughs, misalignment risks undermining the core purpose of medicine. The stakes of this alignment challenge are characterized as among the highest in both technology and ethics, with implications extending from individual patient safety to public trust and potentially existential risks.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDelivery of Health CareHumansAlignmentArtificial intelligenceArtificial superintelligenceDeep learningHealthcarePatient safety

Identifiers

PMID41236701
PMCPMC13038652

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.