ArticlePediatric reports2026
Toward Child-Centred Artificial Intelligence in Pediatric Emergency Medicine: A Perspective on Clinical Decision Support, Stakeholder Engagement and Education.
Article in Pediatric reports, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly recognized as a transformative technology in healthcare, with growing evidence supporting its applicability across time-critical clinical environments. This perspective aims to evaluate the integration of AI and machine learning (ML) into pediatric emergency departments (PEDs) across three core domains: clinical decision support, stakeholder engagement, and medical education. Within clinical decision support, ML architectures have demonstrated high predictive performance across several high-acuity clinical scenarios, including triage stratification, pediatric traumatic brain injury risk classification, early sepsis detection and clinical deterioration prediction, and dermatological assessment. Model interpretability and real-world implementability remain critical prerequisites for clinical adoption, with explainability methods representing fundamental instruments to enhance transparency and stakeholder trust. Regarding stakeholder engagement, the triadic dynamic among clinicians, caregivers, and patients defines a unique communication challenge in PEDs, with large language models (LLMs) showing preliminary utility; however, stakeholder-inclusive model validation and robust data privacy protections for minors remain key challenges, particularly regarding legal ambiguities of LLM deployment in clinical pipelines. In medical education, AI-driven simulation platforms and LLM-generated adaptive curricula represent promising tools for competency-based training across pediatric emergency scenarios. Future directions emphasize the imperative of prospective multicenter validation in pediatric-specific cohorts, rigorous data quality standards addressing conformance, completeness, and plausibility, and the development of pediatric-tailored governance frameworks. Real-world implementation will require the systematic involvement of all stakeholders-including children, caregivers, clinicians, developers, and institutions-as co-designers of equitable, transparent, and safe AI systems for this uniquely vulnerable population.
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.