Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41111750›Full record

ReviewCureus2025

Artificial Intelligence and Digital Biomarkers in Hepatology: Critical Perspectives, Emerging Evidence, and Future Directions.

Pulkit Mehrotra, Vengadakrishnan K, Punit Mehrotra

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 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

3 authors.

Pulkit MehrotraMedicine, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, IND.
Vengadakrishnan KGeneral Medicine, Sri Ramachandra Medical College and Research Institute, Chennai, IND.
Punit MehrotraGastroenterology and Hepatology, Lucknow Gastroenterology and Gynaecology Center, Lucknow, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Liver diseases are a major global health burden, responsible for nearly two million deaths worldwide each year. Despite advances in imaging, serology, and non-invasive fibrosis assessment, late-stage diagnosis persists, limiting curative interventions. Artificial intelligence (AI) and digital biomarkers promise to transform hepatology by enhancing early detection, risk stratification, and remote monitoring. This review provides a critical synthesis of recent evidence in AI-driven imaging, digital histopathology, predictive modeling using electronic health records (EHR), and wearable-based phenotyping. We compare and analyze the strengths and limitations of landmark AI models, highlight real-world implementation barriers such as algorithmic bias and data privacy, and explore emerging paradigms such as federated learning and multimodal integration. While AI tools consistently outperform conventional scores (e.g., Model for End-Stage Liver Disease [MELD]) in predictive accuracy, their clinical adoption remains limited by regulatory, ethical, and validation challenges. In the future, hepatology will require equitable AI systems trained on diverse datasets, integration into electronic medical record (EMR) workflows, and patient-centered digital health platforms. Establishing global AI liver disease registries and multicenter validation trials will be critical to ensure equitable and scalable clinical adoption.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencecirrhosisdigital biomarkershepatocellular carcinomaliver diseasemachine learningpredictive analyticswearable technology

Identifiers

PMID41111750
PMCPMC12535305

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.