Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41603559›Full record

ReviewKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2026

Living publications: How interactive artificial intelligence platforms are transforming research communication.

Felix C Oettl, Matthew Mudford, David Fendrich, Archontis Giannakidis, James A Pruneski, Michael T Hirschmann, Kristian Samuelsson, ESSKA Artificial Intelligence Working Group

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2026. 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

8 authors.

Felix C OettlDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9721-685X
Matthew MudfordDepartment of Orthopaedics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
David FendrichTenfifty, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Archontis GiannakidisSchool of Science and Technology, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, NG11 8NS, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7403-923X
James A PruneskiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8645-9386
Michael T HirschmannUniversity Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, Kantonsspital Baselland, Bruderholz, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4014-424X
Kristian SamuelssonDepartment of Orthopaedics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5383-3370
ESSKA Artificial Intelligence Working Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research communication is undergoing a paradigm shift. The traditional linear manuscript-foundational for centuries-increasingly reveals limitations in the digital era, struggling with information overload, delayed dissemination, and rigid formats. We propose a transition towards 'living publications': interactive, artificial intelligence (AI)-enhanced platforms that evolve with new evidence. Unlike static papers, these systems utilise large language models (LLMs) and vector databases to interpret context, synthesise real-time findings, and map interdisciplinary connections. This shift promises to democratise knowledge, accelerate validation, and enable dynamic evidence synthesis. However, it necessitates robust frameworks for verification, 'version of record' tracking, and peer review to maintain rigor. Successfully navigating this transition requires balancing technological innovation with preservation of academic values-ensuring that increased speed and accessibility enhance rather than diminish the quality of scientific discourse. As interactive platforms mature, they may potentially reshape how knowledge is shared, discovered, and applied, ideally accelerating scientific advancement through more dynamic, accessible, and collaborative research communication. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceBiomedical ResearchInformation DisseminationScholarly CommunicationHumansLarge Language ModelsNatural Language Processingartificial intelligencedigital publishingknowledge disseminationnatural language processingscientific communication

Identifiers

PMID41603559
PMCPMC12948332

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.