ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Exploring an AI-First Healthcare System.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation is not enough: Longitudinal evidence of post-deployment fragility in clinical AI systems.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Article
- The role of AI and team topologies in enhancing decision-making flexibility by reducing cognitive overload.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is now embedded across many aspects of healthcare, yet most implementations remain fragmented, task-specific, and layered onto legacy workflows. This paper does not review AI applications in healthcare per se; instead, it examines what an AI-first healthcare system would look like, one in which AI functions as a foundational organizing principle of care delivery rather than an adjunct technology. We synthesize evidence across ambulatory, inpatient, diagnostic, post-acute, and population health settings to assess where AI capabilities are sufficiently mature to support system-level integration and where critical gaps remain. Across domains, the literature demonstrates strong performance for narrowly defined tasks such as imaging interpretation, documentation support, predictive surveillance, and remote monitoring. However, evidence for longitudinal orchestration, cross-setting integration, and sustained impact on outcomes, costs, and equity remains limited. Key barriers include data fragmentation, workflow misalignment, algorithmic bias, insufficient governance, and lack of prospective, multi-site evaluations. We argue that advancing toward AI-first healthcare requires shifting evaluation from accuracy-centric metrics to system-level outcomes, emphasizing human-enabled AI, interoperability, continuous learning, and equity-aware design. Using hypertension management and patient journey exemplars, we illustrate how AI-first systems can enable proactive risk stratification, coordinated intervention, and continuous support across the care continuum. We further outline architectural and governance requirements, including cloud-enabled infrastructure, interoperability, operational machine learning practices, and accountability frameworks-necessary to operationalize AI-first care safely and at scale, subject to prospective validation, regulatory oversight, and post-deployment surveillance. This review contributes a system-level framework for understanding AI-first healthcare, identifies priority research and implementation gaps, and offers practical considerations for clinicians, health systems, researchers, and policymakers. By reframing AI as infrastructure rather than isolated tools, the AI-first approach provides a pathway toward more proactive, coordinated, and equitable healthcare delivery while preserving the central role of human judgment and trust.
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.