ReviewCommunications medicine2026
Challenges and potential of using digital biomarkers in healthcare and clinical trials.
Review in Communications medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Wearable Devices in Cardiovascular Care: A Narrative Review of the Transition Toward Predictive, Preventive, Personalized, and Participatory Medicine.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Deep Learning Applied to 12-Lead ECGs for Detection of Structural, Metabolic and Systemic Disease.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Neurons Die Not by One Hit, but by Signaling Convergence.Molecular neurobiology · 2026Review
- Peripheral blood biomarkers in PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy: distinguishing predictive from prognostic biomarkers.Frontiers in immunology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital biomarkers use sensors and analytics, to offer continuous monitoring and personalized medicine. In this Perspective, we describe real-world use cases, such as glucose tracking to optimise insulin dosing and wearables to measure heart rhythms to de-risk cardiovascular trials. We also discuss the issues preventing most candidate biomarkers from reaching clinical practice. Evidence generation is costly, regulatory reviews can be redundant, commercial incentives fall short, and data silos can be biased and/or nonrepresentative. By combining harmonized qualification pathways, value-based reimbursement, modular extensions for single-trial biomarkers, and adaptive post-market evidence loops, we propose a path from experimental signal to standard of care.
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.