ArticleBMC primary care2023
Machine learning in general practice: scoping review of administrative task support and automation.
Article in BMC primary care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Impact of Digitalization on European General Practice From the Perspective of General Practitioners: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Explainable multimodal AI and neuro-symbolic clinical decision support system for chronic eye disease management: a digital health implementation study.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Digital morphine: why AI scribes are symptomatic relief for a broken system.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Article
- AI in primary care - a general practitioner's bucket list.The European journal of general practice · 2025Article
- How may grant applications change in future because of artificial intelligence? An international and historical perspective.Internal medicine journal · 2025Article
- [Proposal for Responsible Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Medical Practice].Revista de neurologia · 2025Review
- AI and Primary Care: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Dr AI will see you now: could artificial intelligence replace general practitioners?Irish journal of medical science · 2025Article
- Stepwise considerations when using artificial intelligence tools for administrative tasks in primary care.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2025Article
- The Perceptions of Potential Prerequisites for Artificial Intelligence in Danish General Practice: Vignette-Based Interview Study Among General Practitioners.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Improving Emergency Department Visit Risk Prediction: Exploring the Operational Utility of Applied Patient Portal Messages.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024Article
- Bridging trust gaps: Stakeholder perspectives on AI adoption in the United Kingdom NHS primary care.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly used to support general practice in the early detection of disease and treatment recommendations. However, AI systems aimed at alleviating time-consuming administrative tasks currently appear limited. This scoping review thus aims to summarize the research that has been carried out in methods of machine learning applied to the support and automation of administrative tasks in general practice.
methodsDatabases covering the fields of health care and engineering sciences (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL with full text, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and IEEE Xplore) were searched. Screening for eligible studies was completed using Covidence, and data was extracted along nine research-based attributes concerning general practice, administrative tasks, and machine learning. The search and screening processes were completed during the period of April to June 2022.
results1439 records were identified and 1158 were screened for eligibility criteria. A total of 12 studies were included. The extracted attributes indicate that most studies concern various scheduling tasks using supervised machine learning methods with relatively low general practitioner (GP) involvement. Importantly, four studies employed the latest available machine learning methods and the data used frequently varied in terms of setting, type, and availability.
conclusionThe limited field of research developing in the application of machine learning to administrative tasks in general practice indicates that there is a great need and high potential for such methods. However, there is currently a lack of research likely due to the unavailability of open-source data and a prioritization of diagnostic-based tasks. Future research would benefit from open-source data, cutting-edge methods of machine learning, and clearly stated GP involvement, so that improved and replicable scientific research can be done.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.