ArticleBMC health services research2026
Mapping the landscape of AI in healthcare in Kazakhstan: a scoping review of readiness, development, and adoption.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundThe rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) technologies has created new opportunities for improving healthcare systems worldwide. In Kazakhstan, national digitalization initiatives have supported the introduction of electronic health records and medical information systems; however, the level of AI readiness, development, and real-world implementation in healthcare remains insufficiently explored.
objectiveThis study aimed to synthesize current evidence on the readiness, development, and implementation of AI and ML technologies in the healthcare sector of Kazakhstan.
methodsA scoping review was conducted following the Arksey and O’Malley methodological framework and reported according to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. The protocol of this scoping review was registered on the Open Science Framework (OSF). Electronic searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar for studies published between 2020 and 2025. Inclusion criteria covered empirical studies, policy analyses, and mixed-methods research focusing on AI in Kazakhstan’s healthcare context. Data were extracted using a standardized template and synthesized across three domains: AI readiness, AI development, and AI implementation.
resultsA total of ten studies were included in the final synthesis. Evidence of AI readiness was mainly reported at the educational, professional, regulatory, and system levels, with limited workforce preparedness, insufficient formal training, and gaps in data protection and ethical regulation. AI development was primarily concentrated on technical model creation, including deep learning for medical imaging and automated laboratory interpretation, but often lacked clinical validation. Real-world AI implementation was reported in a small number of clinical settings, particularly in rehabilitation and laboratory medicine, where AI tools were reported to improve workflow efficiency, diagnostic support, and documentation processes.
conclusionsThe Kazakhstan AI/ML healthcare literature is emerging and heterogeneous. While technical development and foundational digital infrastructure are advancing, evidence of routine clinical implementation remains limited, and readiness gaps persist in training, governance, interoperability, and regulatory oversight. Future research should prioritize implementation-focused evaluations, clinical validation, and governance models to support safe adoption across healthcare settings. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.