Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40656847›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Adoption of artificial intelligence applications in clinical practice: Insights from a Survey of Healthcare Organizations in Lombardy, Italy.

Vittoria Ardito, Giulia Cappellaro, Amelia Compagni, Francesco Petracca, Luigi M Preti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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.

Vittoria ArditoCenter for Research on Health and Social Care Management (CERGAS), Government, Health, and Not-for-Profit (GHNP) Area, SDA Bocconi School of Management, Milan, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2034-716X
Giulia CappellaroCenter for Research on Health and Social Care Management (CERGAS), Government, Health, and Not-for-Profit (GHNP) Area, SDA Bocconi School of Management, Milan, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3645-8462
Amelia CompagniCenter for Research on Health and Social Care Management (CERGAS), Government, Health, and Not-for-Profit (GHNP) Area, SDA Bocconi School of Management, Milan, Italy.
Francesco PetraccaCenter for Research on Health and Social Care Management (CERGAS), Government, Health, and Not-for-Profit (GHNP) Area, SDA Bocconi School of Management, Milan, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6076-6919
Luigi M PretiCenter for Research on Health and Social Care Management (CERGAS), Government, Health, and Not-for-Profit (GHNP) Area, SDA Bocconi School of Management, Milan, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1397-7975

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) offers transformative potential in healthcare, yet its adoption is hindered by cultural, organizational, and technological barriers, and little is known about their actual use in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to explore current trends in the adoption of AI applications across healthcare organizations in Lombardy, Italy. Methods: This is a survey study that targeted public and private healthcare organizations in Lombardy and conducted between December 2023 and February 2024, with follow-ups between May and June 2024. It included three sections with up to 22 questions: mapping of clinical AI applications, organizational governance of AI, and perceived adoption barriers. Results: Among the 46 responding organizations, 56 AI applications were identified. Most applications focused on analyzing images or structured health data, and supported diagnostic, prognostic, or treatment optimization activities. Routinely used applications were Conformité Européenne-marked, with radiology being the main clinical area of use. Three distinct approaches emerged. While most organizations (57%) have not yet adopted AI applications, among adopters, 13% are developing AI tools, while 30% exclusively purchase commercial solutions. Conclusions: There is considerable variability in both the types and stages of AI applications adopted in clinical practice by healthcare organizations in Lombardy. In terms of functions, most implementations support diagnostic and prognostic tasks, with strong emphasis on imaging-based tools. Regarding innovation strategies, varying approaches, ranging from exclusively purchasing AI applications to hybrid models that include in-house development, were observed. These findings support broader ecosystem efforts to understand and guide AI implementation in healthcare.

Indexed as

adoptionArtificial intelligenceimplementation gapItalyLombardymachine learningsurvey research

Identifiers

PMID40656847
PMCPMC12254672

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.