SynthesisYonsei medical journal2026
How Does Medical Artificial Intelligence Revolutionize Physician Productivity?
Synthesis in Yonsei medical journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Korean occupational and environmental medicine specialists: demand-supply projections.Annals of occupational and environmental medicine · 2026Article
- Recent advances in artificial intelligence across interventional pulmonology: a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Clinical Application of Artificial Intelligence in Anesthesiology: A Multicenter Retrospective Comparison Between Human Anesthetic Decisions and Algorithmic Recommendations in Non-Cardiac Surgery.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- The augmented physician: AI and the future of clinical cognition.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
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
This study examines the impact of medical artificial intelligence (AI) on physician workload and the quality of patient care. A meta-analysis of empirical studies found that AI significantly reduces physician workload and diagnostic time by automating repetitive interpretation and documentation processes, freeing clinicians to focus solely on patients. Automated generative AI-based electronic medical record systems reduce documentation time by approximately 40%, while voice recognition and AI scribing technologies reduce patient charting time by 28.8%. This reduces administrative burden, a major cause of physician burnout, by more than 30%. In radiology, AI-based interpretation reduced the interpretation time for abnormal contrast-enhanced brain CT lesions by 11.23%, the interpretation time for lung lesions by 52.82%, and the analysis time for peripheral blood smears by 61%. Importantly, these time savings occur naturally and, in some cases, improve diagnostic accuracy for major diseases (e.g., lung nodules, brain lesions, and breast cancer). Furthermore, AI minimizes the workload of interpretation through its automatic filtering function. This includes a 77.4%-86.7% reduction in review time for pulmonary nodules, a 51.3%-72.9% reduction in endometrial slide screening time, and an 86% saving in manual review time for epilepsy electroencephalography evaluation. These findings confirm that AI is establishing itself as a reliable tool that simultaneously improves physician efficiency, diagnostic efficiency, and clinical accuracy. Therefore, future healthcare policies regarding AI should not simply focus on expanding the workforce, but should adopt a strategic approach, optimizing resource efficiency and building a more resilient healthcare system.
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.