Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41490126›Full record

ArticlePLOS digital health2026

Beyond overconfidence: Embedding curiosity and humility for ethical medical AI.

Sebastián Andrés Cajas Ordóñez, Rowell Castro, Leo Anthony Celi, Roben Delos Reyes, Justin Engelmann, Ari Ercole, Almog Hilel, Mahima Kalla, Leo Kinyera, Maximin Lange and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS digital health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

14 authors.

Sebastián Andrés Cajas OrdóñezMIT Critical Data, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0579-6178
Rowell CastroMIT School of Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3230-0089
Leo Anthony CeliLaboratory for Computational Physiology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Roben Delos ReyesSchool of Computing and Information Systems, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1368-6817
Justin EngelmannUniversity College London, London, United Kingdom.
Ari ErcoleCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8350-8093
Almog HilelMIT Critical Data, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Mahima KallaCentre for Digital Transformation of Health, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.
Leo KinyeraMbarara University of Science and Technology, Mbarara, Uganda.
Maximin LangeLaboratory for Computational Physiology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Torleif Markussen LundeUniversity of Bergen, Faculty of Medicine, Bergen, Hordaland, Norway.
Mackenzie J MeniFlorida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Florida, United States of America.
Anna E PremoETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-3067-3433
Jana SedlakovaUniversity of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Contemporary medical AI systems exhibit a critical vulnerability: they deliver confident predictions without mechanisms to express uncertainty or acknowledge limitations, leading to dangerous overreliance in clinical settings. This paper introduces the BODHI (Bridging, Open, Discerning, Humble, Inquiring) framework, a dual-reflective architecture grounded in two essential epistemic virtues: curiosity and humility, as foundational design principles for healthcare AI. Curiosity drives systems to actively explore diagnostic uncertainty, seek additional information when faced with ambiguous presentations, and recognize when training distributions fail to match clinical reality. Humility provides complementary restraint, enabling uncertainty quantification, boundary recognition, and appropriate deference to human expertise. We demonstrate how these virtues function synergistically in a dynamic feedback loop, preventing both reckless exploration and excessive caution while supporting collaborative clinical decision-making. Drawing from psychological theories of curiosity and cross-species evidence of epistemic humility, we argue that these capacities represent fundamental biological design principles essential for systems operating in high-stakes, uncertain environments. The BODHI framework addresses systemic failures in medical AI deployment, from biased training data to institutional workflow pressures, by embedding uncertainty awareness and collaborative restraint into foundational system architecture. Key implementation features include calibrated confidence measures, out-of-distribution detection, curiosity-driven escalation protocols, and transparency mechanisms that adapt to clinical context. Rather than pursuing algorithmic perfection through pure optimization, we advocate for human-AI partnerships that enhance clinical reasoning through mutual accountability and calibrated trust. This approach represents a paradigm shift from overconfident automation toward collaborative systems that embody the wisdom to pause, reflect, and defer when appropriate.

Identifiers

PMID41490126
PMCPMC12768375

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.