Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41860853›Full record

ArticlePLOS digital health2026

Characterizing patients who benefit from mature medical AI models in real-world clinical applications.

Zhiyi Chen, Wei Li, Zhicheng Lin

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. 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

3 authors.

Zhiyi ChenExperimental Research Center for Medical and Psychological Science (ERC-MPS), School of Psychology, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1744-4647
Wei LiExperimental Research Center for Medical and Psychological Science (ERC-MPS), School of Psychology, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Zhicheng LinDepartment of Psychology, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6864-6559

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Medical artificial intelligence (AI) is being rapidly deployed in clinical practice, yet its real-world effectiveness across diverse patient populations remains poorly characterized. We conducted a systematic review combining automated screening (fine-tuned BERT-PubMed classifiers) with manual validation to identify studies of mature medical AI models deployed in healthcare facilities worldwide. We included 171 studies at the "device-into-practice" stage with sufficient demographic and performance data, representing 209,772 patients. Patient access to these models showed marked demographic disparities: geographic concentration was extreme (Dagum-Gini coefficient 0.97, P < .001), with 95.1% of patient cohorts (studies) from high-income (62.2%) or upper-middle-income (32.9%) countries-primarily China (28.7%) and the United States (18.9%)-and no studies from low-income countries. Racial representation was dominated by White (49.1%) and Asian (42.6%) patients, and 63.8% of studies exhibited moderate-to-high sex imbalance. Across all studies, AI models outperformed human practitioners (81.7% vs. 77.8% accuracy, P < .001), but this superiority was confined to in-distribution applications (same geographic/demographic context: 82.9% vs. 77.3%, P < .001) and disappeared in out-of-distribution deployments (cross-geographic/demographic contexts: 74.1% vs. 76.3%, P = .45). In underrepresented populations, AI performance was not significantly different from that of human practitioners. Overall, mature medical AI models are deployed predominantly in economically advantaged settings, with performance advantages concentrated in well-represented demographic groups, highlighting a digital divide in access and effectiveness, and the need for demographic-specific validation.

Identifiers

PMID41860853
PMCPMC13004356

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.