Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42043493›Full record

ArticleInsights into imaging2026

Understanding AI risks from its characteristics and NMPA regulation perspectives.

Yuehua Liu, Wenjin Yu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insights into imaging, 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

2 authors.

Yuehua LiuSchool of Computer Engineering and Science, Shanghai University, Shanghai, China.
Wenjin YuShanghai United Imaging Healthcare Advanced Technology Research Institute Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China. yuwenjin0517@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1101-5588

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AI is reshaping medical research and healthcare delivery, yet the translation of AI innovations into clinically approved medical devices remains limited. This article explores the critical role of regulatory frameworks in bridging this translational gap, with a focus on the full-lifecycle supervision model proposed by China's National Medical Products Administration (NMPA). We first outline the inherent characteristics and risks of AI that challenge conventional evaluation approaches. By examining a patient-centered AI ecosystem encompassing academia, industry, and regulatory bodies, we highlight the misalignment between preclinical AI research output and the relatively small number of approved AI medical devices (AIMDs). In response, we provide a systematic mapping between AI characteristics and corresponding regulatory control measures, offering a point-to-point interpretation of the NMPA's approach. We argue that effective evaluation must extend beyond performance metrics to include development processes and non-functional attributes such as safety, usability, and explainability. A structured, actionable checklist is proposed to guide the comprehensive assessment of AIMDs throughout their lifecycle. This framework aims to enhance regulatory clarity, promote safe deployment, and ultimately improve public trust and patient outcomes in the era of AI-powered medicine. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This framework aims to improve regulatory clarity, supporting safe deployment of AI medical devices, enhancing public trust, and ultimately optimizing patient outcomes in AI-powered healthcare. KEY POINTS: Despite the rapid AI advancement, the number of approved AI medical devices remains disproportionately small, revealing a translational gap. The study identifies several intrinsic characteristics of AI that contribute to regulatory complexity and potential safety risks in clinical practice. A point-to-point mapping is established between AI characteristics and regulatory control measures, providing an interpretation of NMPA full-lifecycle supervision model. A detailed actionable checklist is proposed, extending beyond algorithmic performance, thereby promoting transparent and reproducible AIMDs development. The framework provides a policy-relevant pathway for harmonizing AI innovation with regulatory oversight, fostering patient-centered integration of AI into healthcare.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligence medical devicesArtificial intelligence risksFull-lifecycle managementRegulation responses

Identifiers

PMID42043493
PMCPMC13121643

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.