ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Recent Advances in AI and GenAI for Health Informatics.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- The Unfinished Ecosystem: Why Remote Patient Monitoring Has Matured Unevenly, and What Closing the Gap Will Require.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- What do we talk about when we talk about digital determinants of health? - A systematic review.Digital healthReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The emergence of large language models (LLMs) and generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has marked a turning point in health informatics. AI has become a very helpful tool for health informatics applications, with numerous AI applications in health informatics being reported in the last years. The objective of this paper is to synthesize the common concerns and opportunities raised by recent popular reviews on AI and health informatics. The main methodological topics covered in this up-to-date review include traditional AI, GenAI, and LLMs. The literature search was conducted through the popular academic database Scopus, which covers over one hundred million records, including both computer science and healthcare. Among these popular reviews (measured by the number of citations that each one received), clinical decision support, patient care, electronic health records, hospital management, and remote patient monitoring are the most mentioned healthcare topics. Different from the majority of the existing reviews that narrowly cover on one to a few topics in healthcare, our review is designed with the objective to provide a broad coverage, such that practitioners may benefit from comprehensive insights covering the above mentioned five popular topics in AI health informatics applications. Based on an in-depth analysis of these reviews by human experts, the main AI tools used, their main challenges, and some future directions have been identified in our investigation. Patient privacy, cybersecurity, ethics, clinical accountability, engaging health professionals, benchmarks and standardization, as well as lack of explainability are the common concerns identified from the literature covered in this review.
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.