ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2026
Applications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Breast Cancer Care Delivery and Education: A Scoping Review.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public 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.
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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being applied in breast cancer care, yet its use across the post-diagnosis phase remains poorly mapped. This scoping review aimed to identify and categorise AI applications in post-diagnosis breast cancer care, encompassing treatment planning, treatment delivery, follow-up and surveillance, survivorship, and palliative care. Following JBI methodology and PRISMA-ScR reporting guidelines, four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science) were searched, identifying 3784 records. After screening and full-text assessment, 54 studies published between 2016 and 2024 were included. Machine learning was the predominant technology (81%), followed by generative AI (7%), conversational agents (6%), traditional natural language processing (4%), and data mining (2%). Follow-up and surveillance were the most represented care stage (48%), driven primarily by recurrence prediction models. Most applications were provider-focused (83%), while patient-facing tools accounted for 17% of studies and relied on either conversational agents or generative AI. No studies addressed palliative care. The evidence base was predominantly retrospective (70%) and concentrated in high-income countries (74%). Future research should prioritise prospective evaluation in clinical workflows, address unsupervised patient use of generative AI, and ensure equitable development across diverse populations and care settings.
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.