ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2025
Recommendations for Clinicians, Technologists, and Healthcare Organizations on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: A Position Statement from the Society of General Internal Medicine.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- The future is now: Towards intelligent use of Generative AI in general practice.The European journal of general practice · 2026Article
- From Evidence to Education: New Insights in the 2027 JGIM Medical Education Theme Issue.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Rewiring the Research Enterprise: Why Primary Care Is the Next Frontier.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Evidence, use cases, and implementation safeguards of large language models in primary care.Communications medicine · 2026Review
- Measuring AI Productivity in Episodes of Care.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Integrating AI Scribes into Medical Education: Guardrails for Preserving Clinical Reasoning.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- A Futures Framework for Clinical AI Governance: Anticipating Emerging Risks, Shifting Roles, and Regulatory Challenges.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Governing Patient-Facing AI-Generated Video in Digital Health: A Risk-and-Ethics Matrix for Deployment, Monitoring, and Change Control.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluation of the accuracy and safety of machine translation of patient-specific discharge instructions: a comparative analysis.BMJ quality & safety · 2026Article
- Cognitive reshaping and resurgence of humanness: restructuring the medical education continuum in the era of generative AI.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- The Primary Care Workforce Is Transitioning Away From a Physician-Dominated Model.Family medicine · 2025Article
- Informing a Position Statement on the Use of Large Language Models and AI Scribes in Dermatology in Australia.The Australasian journal of dermatology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Generative artificial intelligence (generative AI) is a new technology with potentially broad applications across important domains of healthcare, but serious questions remain about how to balance the promise of generative AI against unintended consequences from adoption of these tools. In this position statement, we provide recommendations on behalf of the Society of General Internal Medicine on how clinicians, technologists, and healthcare organizations can approach the use of these tools. We focus on three major domains of medical practice where clinicians and technology experts believe generative AI will have substantial immediate and long-term impacts: clinical decision-making, health systems optimization, and the patient-physician relationship. Additionally, we highlight our most important generative AI ethics and equity considerations for these stakeholders. For clinicians, we recommend approaching generative AI similarly to other important biomedical advancements, critically appraising its evidence and utility and incorporating it thoughtfully into practice. For technologists developing generative AI for healthcare applications, we recommend a major frameshift in thinking away from the expectation that clinicians will "supervise" generative AI. Rather, these organizations and individuals should hold themselves and their technologies to the same set of high standards expected of the clinical workforce and strive to design high-performing, well-studied tools that improve care and foster the therapeutic relationship, not simply those that improve efficiency or market share. We further recommend deep and ongoing partnerships with clinicians and patients as necessary collaborators in this work. And for healthcare organizations, we recommend pursuing a combination of both incremental and transformative change with generative AI, directing resources toward both endeavors, and avoiding the urge to rapidly displace the human clinical workforce with generative AI. We affirm that the practice of medicine remains a fundamentally human endeavor which should be enhanced by technology, not displaced by it.
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.