Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39903508›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2025

Challenges and Opportunities for Data Sharing Related to Artificial Intelligence Tools in Health Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Systematic Review and Case Study From Thailand.

Aprajita Kaushik, Capucine Barcellona, Nikita Kanumoory Mandyam, Si Ying Tan, Jasper Tromp

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Aprajita Kaushik *Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-0976-9281
Capucine Barcellona *Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-4708-3558
Nikita Kanumoory MandyamSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0009-0004-8613-8752
Si Ying TanSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-0119-6415
Jasper TrompSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-6043-0713

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth care systems in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) can greatly benefit from artificial intelligence (AI) interventions in various use cases such as diagnostics, treatment, and public health monitoring but face significant challenges in sharing data for developing and deploying AI in health care.

objectiveThis study aimed to identify barriers and enablers to data sharing for AI in health care in LMICs and to test the relevance of these in a local context.

methodsFirst, we conducted a systematic literature search using PubMed, SCOPUS, Embase, Web of Science, and ACM using controlled vocabulary. Primary research studies, perspectives, policy landscape analyses, and commentaries performed in or involving an LMIC context were included. Studies that lacked a clear connection to health information exchange systems or were not reported in English were excluded from the review. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts of the included articles and critically appraised each study. All identified barriers and enablers were classified according to 7 categories as per the predefined framework-technical, motivational, economic, political, legal and policy, ethical, social, organisational, and managerial. Second, we tested the local relevance of barriers and enablers in Thailand through stakeholder interviews with 15 academic experts, technology developers, regulators, policy makers, and health care providers. The interviewers took notes and analyzed data using framework analysis. Coding procedures were standardized to enhance the reliability of our approach. Coded data were reverified and themes were readjusted where necessary to avoid researcher bias.

resultsWe identified 22 studies, the majority of which were conducted across Africa (n=12, 55%) and Asia (n=6, 27%). The most important data-sharing challenges were unreliable internet connectivity, lack of equipment, poor staff and management motivation, uneven resource distribution, and ethical concerns. Possible solutions included improving IT infrastructure, enhancing funding, introducing user-friendly software, and incentivizing health care organizations and personnel to share data for AI-related tools. In Thailand, inconsistent data systems, limited staff time, low health data literacy, complex and unclear policies, and cybersecurity issues were important data-sharing challenges. Key solutions included building a conducive digital ecosystem-having shared data input platforms for health facilities to ensure data uniformity and to develop easy-to-understand consent forms, having standardized guidelines for data sharing, and having compensation policies for data breach victims.

conclusionsAlthough AI in LMICs has the potential to overcome health inequalities, these countries face technical, political, legal, policy, and organizational barriers to sharing data, which impede effective AI development and deployment. When tested in a local context, most of these barriers were relevant. Although our findings might not be generalizable to other contexts, this study can be used by LMICs as a framework to identify barriers and strengths within their health care systems and devise localized solutions for enhanced data sharing.

trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42022360644; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=360644.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDelivery of Health CareDeveloping CountriesInformation DisseminationHumansThailandacademic expertsAI developmentAI toolsartificial intelligencecase studycomputing machinerycybersecuritydata sharingdata systemshealth carehealth care providersinternet connectivitylow- and middle-income countrieslow health data literacyPRISMAstandardized data formatssystematic reviewtechnology developersThailand

Identifiers

PMID39903508
PMCPMC11836587

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.