ReviewEClinicalMedicine2026
Do world-wide policy initiatives for regulating health care related artificial intelligence safeguard the declaration of Helsinki?
Review in EClinicalMedicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial stupidity or logimorphism? How misuse of language warps our thinking about 'artificial intelligence'.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Article
- Exploring perceptions of data risks in AI-enabled nursing research: A qualitative study.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital health technologies and artificial intelligence (AI), are transforming medical research, health care, and public health. The ever-increasing usage of algorithms in health care has challenged governments, regulatory agencies, health organizations, developers, and providers, and AI raises novel ethical challenges that extend beyond the jurisdiction of traditional borders and regulatory health-care processes and structures. While there is growing consensus in recognizing these ethical challenges, there is less agreement over the necessary AI guardrails. This Viewpoint offers a synthesis of representative AI-enabled health policy approaches across jurisdictions and advances practical recommendations for an adaptive, international AI policy and governance framework that will be responsible for monitoring and advancing its regulations in pace with the rapid growth of AI technologies. We use the Declaration of Helsinki as a normative reference point, to derive risk-proportionate safeguards for AI-enabled health across research and non-research settings.
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.