SynthesisFrontiers in digital health2025
Ethical and practical challenges of generative AI in healthcare and proposed solutions: a survey.
Synthesis in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advantages, limitations, and ethical concerns of AI-assisted qualitative research in nursing: insights from a human-AI comparative thematic analysis.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Who Is Responsible When AI Gets Cancer Information Wrong? Implications for Patient Education.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026Article
- DataXflowGen for GenAI-driven model generation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Global English-language-dominated discourse on artificial intelligence in healthcare: a three-year longitudinal analysis of the #AIinHealthcare movement on X.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Clinical nursing interns' perceptions of artificial intelligence-assisted tools in human-AI collaboration: a qualitative persona-based study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in neurocardiology: decoding brain-heart network interactions for clinical and translational insights.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence and digital health equity: a post-pandemic evidence synthesis and implementation safeguards framework.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Generative artificial intelligence in medical education: from knowledge assessment to clinical reasoning and professional competence.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- When institutions, technologies, and platforms co-evolve: a triadic co-evolutionary framework for public health governance in regulated digital service industries.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Deep learning and generative AI for medical imaging and clinical decision support systems: a structured critical review.Frontiers in digital health · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Generative artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming healthcare, but its adoption introduces significant ethical and practical challenges. Algorithmic bias, ambiguous liability, lack of transparency, and data privacy risks can undermine patient trust and create health disparities, making their resolution critical for responsible AI integration. Objectives: This systematic review analyzes the generative AI landscape in healthcare. Our objectives were to: (1) identify AI applications and their associated ethical and practical challenges; (2) evaluate current data-centric, model-centric, and regulatory solutions; and (3) propose a framework for responsible AI deployment. Methods: Following the PRISMA 2020 statement, we conducted a systematic review of PubMed and Google Scholar for articles published between January 2020 and May 2025. A multi-stage screening process yielded 54 articles, which were analyzed using a thematic narrative synthesis. Results: Our review confirmed AI's growing integration into medical training, research, and clinical practice. Key challenges identified include systemic bias from non-representative data, unresolved legal liability, the "black box" nature of complex models, and significant data privacy risks. Proposed solutions are multifaceted, spanning technical (e.g., explainable AI), procedural (e.g., stakeholder oversight), and regulatory strategies. Discussion: Current solutions are fragmented and face significant implementation barriers. Technical fixes are insufficient without robust governance, clear legal guidelines, and comprehensive professional education. Gaps in global regulatory harmonization and frameworks ill-suited for adaptive AI persist. A multi-layered, socio-technical approach is essential to build trust and ensure the safe, equitable, and ethical deployment of generative AI in healthcare. Conclusions: The review confirmed that generative AI has a growing integration into medical training, research, and clinical practice. Key challenges identified include systemic bias stemming from non-representative data, unresolved legal liability, the "black box" nature of complex models, and significant data privacy risks. These challenges can undermine patient trust and create health disparities. Proposed solutions are multifaceted, spanning technical (such as explainable AI), procedural (like stakeholder oversight), and regulatory strategies.
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.