Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42791937›Full record

ReviewBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2026

Intelligent Real-Time Healthcare and Biomedical Monitoring Systems: A Narrative Review of AI, IoT, and Emerging Technologies.

Abdussalam Elhanashi, Sergio Saponara

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 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

2 authors.

Abdussalam ElhanashiDepartment of Information Engineering, University of Pisa, 56122 Pisa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2514-1585
Sergio SaponaraDepartment of Information Engineering, University of Pisa, 56122 Pisa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6724-4219

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChronic disease management, an ageing global population, and the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic have pushed real-time, continuous health monitoring from a research curiosity toward routine clinical practice. Artificial intelligence (AI), the Internet of Medical Things (IoMT), edge computing, and next-generation wireless networks are converging to enable systems that sense, interpret, and act on physiological data outside the traditional hospital setting.

methodsThis is a narrative review, not a PRISMA-guided systematic or scoping review; it synthesises 75 sources (a mixture of primary studies, systematic/scoping reviews, and meta-analyses), individually verified against their published record. The topics span IoMT system architecture and security, wearable and implantable sensing, deep learning for electrocardiogram (ECG), fall-related and human-activity signal analysis, edge and TinyML deployment, federated learning, blockchain-based health-record security, medical imaging diagnostics, explainable AI (XAI), continuous glucose monitoring, 5G/6G-enabled telemonitoring, digital twins, consumer-grade and contactless cardiac sensing, neurological and mental health monitoring, and the materials, regulatory, and acute care infrastructure surrounding real-time deployment. Studies were organised into a five-layer architectural taxonomy spanning perception, edge, network, cloud, and application layers.

resultsReported accuracies for deep learning models on ECG arrhythmia classification range from 91% to 99.5% across the reviewed studies, but the figures come from different datasets, class definitions, and validation protocols and are therefore not directly comparable; within this heterogeneous evidence, edge-deployed models report accuracies in the 85-96% range at substantially reduced power budgets. Deep-learning-based fall detection and chest radiograph classification are each reported, in the individual studies reviewed, to outperform threshold-based or classical alternatives, though this has not been established through head-to-head comparison across the full evidence base. Federated learning and blockchain are discussed as technical mechanisms that can contribute to data privacy and record integrity; neither constitutes regulatory compliance with frameworks such as HIPAA or the GDPR on its own. Persistent obstacles identified across the reviewed literature include dataset heterogeneity, limited external clinical validation, energy-constrained edge hardware, low clinician trust in opaque models, and fragmented interoperability standards.

conclusionsThe evidence reviewed here is consistent with, but does not by itself establish, a layered, privacy-preserving, and explainable architecture that couples lightweight on-device inference with federated or blockchain-secured cloud learning as a design direction for future real-time healthcare monitoring systems. Future work should prioritise standardised benchmarking, prospective clinical validation, and regulatory-aligned data-governance frameworks.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceblockchaindeep learningdigital twinedge computingexplainable AIfederated learninginternet of medical thingsnarrative reviewremote patient monitoringTinyMLwearable sensors

Identifiers

PMID42791937
PMCPMC13603393

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.