ReviewNature reviews. Drug discovery2026
Artificial intelligence in drug discovery - what it is, where we stand and the path forward.
Review in Nature reviews. Drug discovery, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) in drug discovery has attracted increasing interest over the past decade. It is now time for a critical review of progress in the field: where did we advance - and where are we yet to see impact - when it comes to what matters in drug discovery, which is to deliver safer and more efficacious medicines to patients faster? Although a wide variety of AI methods have been developed, applied and benchmarked, evidence of their clinically relevant impact is, so far, disappointingly limited. In this Perspective we discuss potential reasons, including an insufficient focus on clinical translation during model development, difficulties with applying AI algorithms on conditional life science data, and insufficient problem definitions and the resulting underspecification of computational models for real-world use cases. 'Technology push' compared with 'science pull' is also likely to be an underlying factor, as well as the substantial time required to operationalize technical capabilities into systems that are sufficiently scaled and accessible for users. We provide recommendations for the development of AI in drug discovery with the aim of increasing its translational relevance. For example, benchmarking studies of AI tools in drug discovery need to move on from model validation and instead focus on their ability to improve decision making.
Identifiers
42567977What 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.