ReviewNeuro-oncology advances
Artificial intelligence in neuro-oncology: Current advances and legal considerations in the European Union.
Review in Neuro-oncology advances. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Applications utilizing artificial intelligence (AI) have become a ubiquitous, indispensable part of modern life. This also applies to medicine where AI systems can support staff in decision-making processes and administrative tasks, but there is still uncertainty about the legality of their use. This review introduces examples from neuro-oncology, highlighting legal aspects and providing suggestions for the application of the Medical Device Regulation, the European Regulation on Artificial Intelligence (AI Act), the General Data Protection Regulation, and potential liability issues. AI systems for medical use are medical devices and high-risk AI systems that require the necessary certifications and entail strict requirements for clinical use. Since this may also apply to general AI tools if they are used for medical purposes other than their intended use cases, such use must be critically examined. However, the ultimate responsibility for using AI systems in a medical setting lies with the physicians, who need to be appropriately trained and made aware of the rules and regulations.
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.