Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39780964›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2025

AI Thinking: a framework for rethinking artificial intelligence in practice.

Denis Newman-Griffis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

1 author.

Denis Newman-GriffisCentre for Machine Intelligence, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield S1 3JD, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0473-4226

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence is transforming the way we work with information across disciplines and practical contexts. A growing range of disciplines are now involved in studying, developing and assessing the use of AI in practice, but these disciplines often employ conflicting understandings of what AI is and what is involved in its use. New, interdisciplinary approaches are needed to bridge competing conceptualizations of AI in practice and help shape the future of AI use. I propose a novel conceptual framework called AI Thinking, which models key decisions and considerations involved in AI use across disciplinary perspectives. AI Thinking addresses five practice-based competencies involved in applying AI in context: motivating AI use, formulating AI methods, assessing available tools and technologies, selecting appropriate data and situating AI in the sociotechnical contexts it is used in. A hypothetical case study is provided to illustrate the application of AI Thinking in practice. This article situates AI Thinking in broader cross-disciplinary discourses of AI, including its connections to ongoing discussions around AI literacy and AI-driven innovation. AI Thinking can help to bridge between the work of diverse disciplines, contexts and actors in the AI space, and shape AI efforts in education, industrial development and policy.

Indexed as

AI applicationsAI Thinkingartificial intelligencecritical data studiesinterdisciplinaritymachine learning

Identifiers

PMID39780964
PMCPMC11706651

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 OpenQuestion graph.