ReviewBrain sciences2026
Current State of the Clinical Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Stroke: A Literature Review.
Review in Brain sciences, 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.
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Acute Ischemic Stroke Care: A Narrative Review.Missouri medicineReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a transformative tool in medicine, leveraging rapid analysis of large datasets to accelerate diagnosis, enhance clinical decision-making, and improve clinical workflows. This is highly relevant in stroke care given the time-sensitive nature of the disease process. This review evaluates the current landscape of evidence-based medicine utilizing AI in stroke, with emphasis on its use in phases of clinical care across the stroke continuum, including pre-hospital, acute, and recovery phases. This offers a comprehensive understanding of the current state of AI in both practice and literature.
methodsA review of major databases was conducted, identifying peer-reviewed literature evaluating the use of AI and its level of evidence across the stroke continuum. Given the heterogeneity of study designs, interventions, and outcome metrics spanning multiple disciplines, findings were synthesized narratively.
resultsAcross all phases of care, there remain no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating patient-level outcome data using AI (Level A). In the pre-hospital phase of care, AI has been used to identify stroke symptoms and assist EMS routing/training but presently remains limited to research. AI is most studied in the acute phase of care, representing the only phase to achieve commercial application in imaging detection and telestroke assistance, supported by non-randomized evidence (Level B-NR). In the recovery phase, AI may enhance wearable technologies, tele-rehabilitation, and robotics/brain-computer interfaces, with early RCTs (Level B-R) supporting the latter two, representing the strongest evidence for AI in stroke care to date.
conclusionsDespite the potential for AI to transform all phases of care across the stroke continuum, major challenges remain, including transparency, generalizability, equity, and the need for externally validated clinical studies.
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.