ReviewCureus2026
Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Decision-Making: Current Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions in Modern Healthcare.
Review in Cureus, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a major driver of transformation in clinical decision-making and healthcare delivery systems. Machine learning, deep learning, natural language processing, and computer vision are increasingly being integrated into clinical workflows to support diagnosis, risk prediction, treatment planning, and operational efficiency. This narrative review synthesizes recent literature on the role of AI in clinical decision-making across key domains, including medical imaging, electronic health record analysis, precision medicine, clinical risk stratification, surgical support, and drug discovery. It also examines major barriers to safe and effective implementation, particularly algorithmic bias, limited external validation, data privacy concerns, poor interpretability, workflow disruption, and regulatory uncertainty. Ethical and medicolegal issues, including transparency, accountability, equity, and the effect of AI on clinician-patient relationships, are also discussed. Current evidence suggests that AI performs well in selected narrow tasks, especially in image-based and prediction-focused applications, but its reliability and clinical value remain inconsistent in complex real-world settings. Future progress is likely to depend on stronger prospective validation, explainable and multimodal systems, privacy-preserving learning approaches, and better integration of AI into clinical practice. The responsible use of AI in healthcare will require a multidisciplinary, patient-centered approach that balances innovation with safety, ethics, and clinical usefulness.
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.