Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42147713›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine2026

Artificial Intelligence Literacy in Intensive Care: From Algorithmic Fluency to Clinical Accountability.

Tanmoy Ghatak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, 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

1 author.

Tanmoy GhatakDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5916-1832

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI), particularly large language models (LLMs), is increasingly being used in intensive care environments to assist with documentation, literature synthesis, and clinical information retrieval. While these tools offer efficiency and cognitive support in high-pressure settings such as the intensive care unit (ICU), they also introduce risks related to hallucination, automation bias, and a lack of explainability. Aim: To examine the emerging challenges associated with AI use in critical care-especially hallucination and algorithmic overconfidence-and to highlight the need for structured AI literacy and governance frameworks for intensivists. Findings: Recent analyses show that AI hallucination-the generation of fabricated or distorted information-is an intrinsic feature of probabilistic language models rather than a rare technical error. In critical care contexts, this may manifest as fabricated references, distorted clinical reasoning, or overconfident recommendations. Additional concerns include automation bias, where clinicians may inadvertently rely on algorithmic outputs, and opacity in AI decision-making processes. Emerging evidence demonstrates that while AI tools may enhance efficiency in tasks such as documentation and knowledge summarization, they remain unreliable for unsupervised clinical reasoning. Conclusion: The integration of AI into intensive care practice should be guided by structured AI literacy, institutional governance frameworks, and continued human oversight. Artificial intelligence can serve as a supportive cognitive tool, but responsibility for clinical judgment, patient safety, and ethical decision-making must remain firmly with the clinician. How to cite this article: Ghatak T. Artificial Intelligence Literacy in Intensive Care: From Algorithmic Fluency to Clinical Accountability. Indian J Crit Care Med 2026;30(4):272-274.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceArtificial intelligence hallucinationClinical decision-makingCritical care medicine

Identifiers

PMID42147713
PMCPMC13177757

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.