ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2025
Role of artificial intelligence in gastric diseases.
Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- AI in Esophageal Motility Disorders: Systematic Review of High-Resolution Manometry Studies.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence in endoscopic prediction of submucosal invasion in gastric neoplasms: systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Review
- Applications of Large Language Models in Medical Research: From Systematic Reviews to Clinical Studies.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- [Clinical Implementation of Artificial Intelligence in Endoscopy: A Human-Artificial Intelligence Interaction Perspective].The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 2026Review
- Beyond diagnostic accuracy: navigating the artificial intelligence data tsunami toward value-based implementation in gastroenterology.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in gastroenterology has evolved from basic computer-aided detection to sophisticated multimodal frameworks that enable real-time clinical decision support. This study presents AI applications in gastric disease diagnosis and management, highlighting the transition from domain-specific deep learning to general-purpose large language models. Our research reveals a key finding: AI effectiveness demonstrates an inverse relationship with user expertise, with moderate-expertise practitioners benefiting the most, whereas experts and novices show limited performance gains. We developed a clinical decision support system achieving 96% lesion detection internally and 82%-87% classification accuracy in external validation. Multimodal integration, which combines endoscopic images, clinical histories, laboratory results, and genomic data, enables comprehensive disease assessment and personalized treatment. The emergence of large language models with expanding context windows and multiagent architectures represents a paradigm shift in medical AI. Furthermore, emerging technologies are expanding AI's potential applications, and feasibility studies on smart glasses in endoscopy training suggest opportunities for hands-free assistance, although clinical implementation challenges persist. This minireview addresses persistent limitations including geographic bias in training data, regulatory hurdles, ethical considerations regarding patient privacy and AI accountability, and the concentration of AI development among technology giants. Successful integration requires balancing innovation with patient safety, while preserving the irreplaceable role of human clinical judgment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.