Evidence mapPaperPMID 41786310Full record

ReviewPharmacopsychiatry2026

Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery and Development: Raising Quality per Decision.

Shota Furukawa, Hiroyuki Uchida, Taishiro Kishimoto

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmacopsychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Shota FurukawaDepartment of Neuropsychiatry, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0009-0002-9343-5259
Hiroyuki UchidaDepartment of Neuropsychiatry, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-0628-7036
Taishiro KishimotoCenter for the Promotion of Interdiciplinary Research in Medicine and Life Science, Keio University School of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Abstract: Drug research and development continuously encounters prolonged timelines, escalating costs, and high attrition rates. In this narrative review, we integrated recent advances in artificial intelligence across target identification, drug repurposing, de novo molecular design, structural biology, safety prediction, and artificial intelligence-supported clinical development, aligning these innovations with evolving global regulatory frameworks. Predictive and interpretable artificial intelligence could enhance the quality of decision-making throughout the research and development process when combined with causal or mechanistic priors, synthesis-aware and physics-informed molecular design, external validation with clear applicability domains, and governance systems aligned with multiple regulatory guidelines and qualified digital endpoint applications. Case studies of artificial intelligence-assisted discovery and repurposing demonstrate shorter development timelines, improved compound quality, and higher-level early-phase success, while underscoring challenges such as overfitting, model generalizability, and dataset bias. Establishing a context-of-use-based "credibility plan" and adopting equity-by-design through the inclusion of non-European datasets and subgroup performance evaluation are essential for achieving generalizable impact. Artificial intelligence integration with new approach methodologies and adaptive or covariate-adjusted clinical trials may help reduce development inefficiency without compromising scientific or ethical rigor.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDrug DevelopmentDrug DiscoveryHumans

Identifiers

PMID41786310
PMCPMC13288427

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.