ReviewEuropean journal of medical research2026
Applying artificial intelligence in neurodevelopmental disorders management and research.
Review in European journal of medical research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being used in the diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring of neurodevelopmental disorders, enabling earlier detection, personalised interventions, and continuous support. Traditional machine-learning models such as logistic regression, random forests, and support vector machines remain valuable for their interpretability and their ability to integrate multimodal clinical data. Deep-learning (DL) approaches, including convolutional neural networks and transformer-based architectures, improve the analysis of neuroimaging and behavioural datasets and strengthen diagnostic and prognostic performance. Important challenges remain, including limited transparency in DL systems, ongoing concerns about data privacy and algorithmic bias, and a lack of large and diverse paediatric datasets that restricts generalisability. Interpretability tools such as SHAP and LIME offer partial solutions but still lack standardised evaluation. At the same time, AI-driven robotic platforms are enhancing therapeutic engagement and supporting skill acquisition in children with neurodevelopmental conditions. This review highlights that AI tools have strong potential to act as clinical adjuncts rather than replacements, providing earlier detection, personalised management, and scalable care models. Realising this potential will require rigorous validation, ethical safeguards, and thoughtful integration into human-led care pathways.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.