ArticleJMIR research protocols2023
The Need to Prioritize Model-Updating Processes in Clinical Artificial Intelligence (AI) Models: Protocol for a Scoping Review.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Navigating Healthcare AI Governance: the Comprehensive Algorithmic Oversight and Stewardship Framework for Risk and Equity.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026Article
- Moving beyond the benchmarks: Five foundational principles for meaningful AI evaluation in healthcare.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Multicenter validation and updating of the ELDER-ICU model for severity assessment in elderly critical illness.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Adult Cardiovascular Medicine and Surgery: Real-World Deployments and Outcomes.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
- Predictive model for severe intraventricular hemorrhage risk in preterm infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
- A bibliometric analysis of large language model-based AI chatbots in surgery.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- In Silico Evaluation of Algorithm-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Machine learning for healthcare that matters: Reorienting from technical novelty to equitable impact.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Prediction models for post-discharge mortality among under-five children with suspected sepsis in Uganda: A multicohort analysis.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith an increase in the number of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) algorithms available for clinical settings, appropriate model updating and implementation of updates are imperative to ensure applicability, reproducibility, and patient safety.
objectiveThe objective of this scoping review was to evaluate and assess the model-updating practices of AI and ML clinical models that are used in direct patient-provider clinical decision-making.
methodsWe used the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) checklist and the PRISMA-P protocol guidance in addition to a modified CHARMS (Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies) checklist to conduct this scoping review. A comprehensive medical literature search of databases, including Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science, was conducted to identify AI and ML algorithms that would impact clinical decision-making at the level of direct patient care. Our primary end point is the rate at which model updating is recommended by published algorithms; we will also conduct an assessment of study quality and risk of bias in all publications reviewed. In addition, we will evaluate the rate at which published algorithms include ethnic and gender demographic distribution information in their training data as a secondary end point.
resultsOur initial literature search yielded approximately 13,693 articles, with approximately 7810 articles to consider for full reviews among our team of 7 reviewers. We plan to complete the review process and disseminate the results by spring of 2023.
conclusionsAlthough AI and ML applications in health care have the potential to improve patient care by reducing errors between measurement and model output, currently there exists more hype than hope because of the lack of proper external validation of these models. We expect to find that the AI and ML model-updating methods are proxies for model applicability and generalizability on implementation. Our findings will add to the field by determining the degree to which published models meet the criteria for clinical validity, real-life implementation, and best practices to optimize model development, and in so doing, reduce the overpromise and underachievement of the contemporary model development process. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/37685.
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.