Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40267068›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2025

From algorithms to negotiations: Why health diplomacy must adapt.

Brian Li Han Wong, Garry Aslanyan, Warisa Panichkriangkrai, Ricardo Baptista Leite, Jemilah Mahmood, Anders Nordström

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Brian Li Han WongGlobal Health Diplomacy Institutional Network, The Health Diplomacy Initiative, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8709-5847
Garry AslanyanGlobal Health Diplomacy Institutional Network, The Health Diplomacy Initiative, Stockholm, Sweden.
Warisa PanichkriangkraiGlobal Health Diplomacy Institutional Network, The Health Diplomacy Initiative, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3567-3128
Ricardo Baptista LeiteHealthAI, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3503-8733
Jemilah MahmoodGlobal Health Diplomacy Institutional Network, The Health Diplomacy Initiative, Stockholm, Sweden.
Anders NordströmGlobal Health Diplomacy Institutional Network, The Health Diplomacy Initiative, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Health diplomacy traditionally relies on consensus-building across nations, yet the accelerating integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into health systems poses new governance challenges. Rapidly changing geopolitical conditions-exemplified by shifts in U.S. global health funding and the expansion of AI beyond national boundaries-underscore the urgency of rethinking traditional approaches. This paper, based on insights from the Prince Mahidol Award Conference 2025 side meeting on "Navigating the Future: AI & Global Health Diplomacy," examines how AI can reshape the practice of health diplomacy, both empowering and unsettling global health objectives. We first explore the promise of AI in enhancing disease surveillance, resource allocation, and progress toward universal health coverage. However, inadequate governance can exacerbate inequalities, particularly if AI remains in the hands of profit-focused enterprises or if digital divides persist. Health diplomacy, therefore, must expand its purview to include technical literacy, data ethics, and robust regulatory frameworks that safeguard equity and transparency in AI design and deployment. To illustrate these dynamics, we emphasise the interplay of social, political, commercial, and digital determinants of health, each feeding into AI-driven innovations. Strong diplomatic engagement is critical to ensuring that AI becomes a tool for mutual benefit rather than a catalyst for further fragmentation. Effective policies must integrate environmental sustainability considerations alongside cross-sector collaboration. We conclude that, although AI cannot replace the vital human element of negotiation and trust-building, it can substantially enhance global health outcomes when governed ethically and inclusively. The future of health diplomacy, shaped by AI, requires agile adaptation and unified strategies to preserve equity and planetary well-being.

Identifiers

PMID40267068
PMCPMC12017475

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.