Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40063929›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025

Generative AI Models in Time-Varying Biomedical Data: Scoping Review.

Rosemary He, Varuni Sarwal, Xinru Qiu, Yongwen Zhuang, Le Zhang, Yue Liu, Jeffrey Chiang

Erratum issuedAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article 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. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Proceedings of the ... AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Foundation Models for Generative AI in Time-Series Forecasting.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Rosemary HeDepartment of Computer Science, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8307-3958
Varuni SarwalDepartment of Computer Science, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7563-9835
Xinru QiuDivision of Biomedical Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California Riverside, Riverside, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1391-252X
Yongwen ZhuangDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4220-0444
Le ZhangInstitute for Integrative Genome Biology, University of California Riverside, Riverside, CA, United States.ORCID 0009-0008-0205-2150
Yue LiuInstitute for Cellular and Molecular Biology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1200-3754
Jeffrey ChiangDepartment of Computational Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6843-1355

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTrajectory modeling is a long-standing challenge in the application of computational methods to health care. In the age of big data, traditional statistical and machine learning methods do not achieve satisfactory results as they often fail to capture the complex underlying distributions of multimodal health data and long-term dependencies throughout medical histories. Recent advances in generative artificial intelligence (AI) have provided powerful tools to represent complex distributions and patterns with minimal underlying assumptions, with major impact in fields such as finance and environmental sciences, prompting researchers to apply these methods for disease modeling in health care.

objectiveWhile AI methods have proven powerful, their application in clinical practice remains limited due to their highly complex nature. The proliferation of AI algorithms also poses a significant challenge for nondevelopers to track and incorporate these advances into clinical research and application. In this paper, we introduce basic concepts in generative AI and discuss current algorithms and how they can be applied to health care for practitioners with little background in computer science.

methodsWe surveyed peer-reviewed papers on generative AI models with specific applications to time-series health data. Our search included single- and multimodal generative AI models that operated over structured and unstructured data, physiological waveforms, medical imaging, and multi-omics data. We introduce current generative AI methods, review their applications, and discuss their limitations and future directions in each data modality.

resultsWe followed the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines and reviewed 155 articles on generative AI applications to time-series health care data across modalities. Furthermore, we offer a systematic framework for clinicians to easily identify suitable AI methods for their data and task at hand.

conclusionsWe reviewed and critiqued existing applications of generative AI to time-series health data with the aim of bridging the gap between computational methods and clinical application. We also identified the shortcomings of existing approaches and highlighted recent advances in generative AI that represent promising directions for health care modeling.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceAlgorithmsBig DataHumansMachine Learningalgorithmsartificial intelligencedisease trajectoryelectronic health recordselectronic medical recordsforecastinggenerative artificial intelligencemachine learningsystematic reviewstime series

Identifiers

PMID40063929
PMCPMC11933772

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.