ReviewMultiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England)2026
AI-enabled Living Labs: Accelerating innovation in multiple sclerosis care and research.
Review in Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring attitudes and acceptance of artificial intelligence in multiple sclerosis from the patient perspective.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- MSPEECH (multiple sclerosis monitoring through speech interaction in clinic and at home): a Living Lab study protocol for co-created, speech-based digital biomarkers in multiple sclerosis.Frontiers in digital health · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid rise of artificial intelligence (AI) and digital health technologies presents new opportunities for personalized care in multiple sclerosis (MS). However, implementation in routine practice is limited by regulatory hurdles, fragmented infrastructure and a lack of agile real-world evaluation methods. Living Labs (LLs) emerge as dynamic environments for advancing MS care and research, supporting early testing and iterative development of digital tools, while fostering structured collaboration among patients, clinicians, researchers and regulators. In this review, we conceptually frame LLs in MS and provide a concrete, clinic-ready implementation framework for AI-enabled application in real-world practice. Using a digital-based voice task as an exemplar with automated feature extraction, we detail integration patterns and define key performance indicators for feasibility, data quality, usability and clinical utility. We show how this co-designed model can generate decision-relevant evidence, may help shorten time-to-action and embed innovation seamlessly into clinical workflows. Finally, we align LL operations with ethical and regulatory standards and outline strategies to responsibly scale across centres.
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.