ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2026
Elevating Management Reasoning to Preserve Professional Identity in the AI Era.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cognitive reshaping and resurgence of humanness: restructuring the medical education continuum in the era of generative AI.Frontiers in medicine · 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
AI systems are rapidly approaching expert-level diagnostic reasoning; however, management reasoning -the art of translating diagnoses into personalized care-remains distinctly human. While both are forms of clinical judgment, they emphasize different skills: diagnosis is a categorization task that answers "what's wrong?"; management is a prioritization task that answers "what should we do?" Medicine has long privileged diagnostic virtuosity. We drill differential diagnosis in morning report but rarely teach with equal rigor how to navigate real-world trade-offs for patients who value independence over longevity. This imbalance leaves us vulnerable as AI masters pattern recognition. Management reasoning requires what AI cannot currently replicate: integrating human values, navigating system constraints, and building therapeutic relationships. These fundamentally human skills-not diagnostic prowess-should anchor our professional identity. To secure medicine's future, we argue for a deliberate reorientation of medical education and clinical culture. Making space to teach and showcase management reasoning is not just an educational priority; it is essential for defending clinician judgment, relational care, and public trust as AI reshapes medicine's social contract. The goal is not merely finding the "right" answer but preparing clinicians to find the best answer for each unique patient. This is how human care remains truly human.
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.