Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41502906›Full record

ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2026

The Infectious Diseases Orchestrator: Embracing AI Literacy in the Agentic Era.

John J Hanna, Richard J Medford

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

2 authors.

John J HannaInformation Services, ECU Health, Greenville, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0909-9396
Richard J MedfordInformation Services, ECU Health, Greenville, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9814-8043

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming healthcare, with agentic AI systems positioned to perceive, reason, and act within clinical environments. For infectious diseases (ID) clinicians, agentic AI presents both opportunity and imperative; to embrace AI literacy and remain actively engaged in shaping their design rather than becoming passive adopters in clinical care, antimicrobial stewardship, and infection control. Historical examples show that professions failing to adapt to automation faced challenges, highlighting the urgency for ID specialists to understand AI's evolving role. While AI can streamline documentation, surveillance, and decision support, clinicians must advocate for high-quality data, define appropriate automation boundaries, and ensure human oversight in critical decisions. ID communities should lead efforts to educate clinicians, establish AI governance policies in ID operational practices, and foster interdisciplinary collaboration to guide responsible AI integration. AI literacy is the "no-regret" investment that will enable clinicians to lead this transformation-ensuring that AI supports, augments, and, when appropriate, automates the repetitive, searchable, and time-consuming tasks. The future of ID practice will be defined by how effectively clinicians leverage AI to enhance care, promote equitable access, and reclaim time for the human dimensions of medicine.

Indexed as

AI agentsartificial intelligenceinfectious diseases practicelarge language modelsnatural language processing

Identifiers

PMID41502906
PMCPMC12772196

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.