ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2026
Integrating AI Into Governmental Public Health Decision Making: Challenges, Considerations, and a Path Forward.
Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Unlabelled: Public health emergencies such as pandemics, natural disasters, and epidemics may require rapid, high-stakes decisions often made by elected officials with limited public health training. Artificial intelligence (AI) holds significant promise to enhance the quality, transparency, and timeliness of governmental decision-making during such crises. This paper examines the potential of AI as a decision-support tool for elected officials while identifying key technical, logistical, ethical, and policy challenges. Technical considerations include model accuracy, data representativeness, and privacy protection, while ethical imperatives center on fairness, transparency, and accountability to prevent amplification of existing health disparities. The paper further explores workforce development needs, emphasizing AI literacy and cross-sector collaboration to enable informed use of AI insights. This viewpoint presents a novel AI Decision Support Lifecycle framework specifically designed for governmental public health emergency response, mapping six phases from problem definition through post-emergency evaluation. We provide stakeholder-specific recommendations for model developers, health agencies, and elected officials, and illustrate practical application through a detailed case example and use cases. Drawing on empirical evidence regarding digital health technologies and AI governance, we emphasize that technology deployment alone is insufficient. Successful implementation requires complementary investments in organizational capacity, data infrastructure, workforce training, community engagement, and continuous evaluation. AI integration also requires robust governance frameworks, continuous model evaluation, and alignment with existing crisis management structures. Policy recommendations highlight the importance of ethical AI frameworks, risk assessments, and public engagement to foster trust. Ultimately, AI can strengthen public health decision-making if developed and implemented responsibly within transparent and equitable systems.
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.