Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41769329›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026

Operationalizing trustworthy artificial intelligence in clinical and operational workflows.

Kunal Khashu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Kunal KhashuHCA Healthcare, Nashville, TN, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly deployed across healthcare systems to support clinical decision-making, optimize operational processes, and improve population health outcomes. Despite substantial investment and rapid advances in model performance, real-world adoption and sustained impact remain limited. A central barrier is the challenge of trust among clinicians, administrators, patients, and regulators in AI-enabled systems. While the concept of "trustworthy AI" is widely invoked, existing frameworks largely emphasize technical model properties and ethical principles without sufficient guidance for operational implementation. This paper argues that trustworthiness is not an intrinsic attribute of AI models but an emergent property of socio-technical systems in which AI is embedded. We propose a comprehensive framework for operationalizing trustworthy AI that shifts attention from model-centric validation to workflow-level design, governance, and continuous evaluation. By integrating decision-centered design, human-AI role delineation, failure visibility, embedded accountability, and longitudinal performance monitoring, the framework provides a pragmatic foundation for deploying AI systems that are safe, equitable, and sustainable in both clinical and operational contexts.

Indexed as

artificial intelligence (AI)digital health (DH)digital transformationhealthcare administrationresponsible AI

Identifiers

PMID41769329
PMCPMC12946113

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.