ReviewJournal of experimental orthopaedics2026
From de-skilling to up-skilling: How artificial intelligence will augment the modern physician.
Review in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 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.
- Beyond Algorithmic Oversight: Internal Morality of Medicine and Meaningful Human Control in AI-Assisted Care.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into orthopaedic practice is no longer a theoretical future but an inevitable reality. As AI models increasingly demonstrate superior performance in specific diagnostic and administrative tasks, concerns have arisen regarding the potential replacement of physicians and the erosion of clinical competency. This narrative review synthesizes current evidence to reframe the debate from a fear of replacement to a strategy of augmentation. Pathways leading to 'deskilling'-the loss of existing expertise-and the emerging threat of 'never-skilling', where trainees fail to acquire foundational proficiencies due to premature reliance on automation, are analysed. Current AI applications function primarily as assistants rather than autonomous agents, offering an opportunity for 'upskilling' by liberating clinicians from repetitive administrative burdens and standardizing diagnostic accuracy. However, realizing this benefit requires deliberate educational mechanisms; one has to argue that maintaining clinical excellence requires a shift in training paradigms, emphasizing critical oversight where human reasoning validates AI outputs. AI will not replace the orthopaedic surgeon in the foreseeable future; rather, it will necessitate an evolution of the physician's role. By automating routine tasks, AI allows the modern physician to operate at a higher level, focusing on complex decision-making, procedural excellence and patient empathy. The future requires mechanisms to ensure AI remains a tool for professional elevation rather than a catalyst for skill degradation. Level of Evidence: Level V.
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.