SynthesisJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2026
Translation readiness of model-based synthetic tabular data in healthcare: a systematic review and governance audit.
Synthesis in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the clinical applications and translation readiness of model-based synthetic tabular data in healthcare, and identify gaps in governance reporting that may hinder translation. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe systematically searched Ovid MEDLINE and Embase (2010-August 2025; PROSPERO: CRD42025635514) for studies that generated and applied model-based synthetic tabular data in clinical contexts. Screening used a "human-in-the-loop" large language model workflow alongside independent manual review, achieving 100% sensitivity for included studies. Unlike prior reviews focused primarily on evaluation methodology, we mapped use-cases and deployment paradigms, and audited translation-readiness reporting using a predefined governance framework (validation depth, privacy, fairness, regulatory alignment).
resultsThirty-seven studies (2019-2025) were included. GANs predominated; other approaches included VAEs, diffusion models, LLM-based synthesis, and Bayesian networks. Dataset augmentation was the primary application, often improving downstream model performance for rare outcomes. Emerging applications included synthetic control cohorts and algorithmic bias mitigation. Translation-readiness reporting was limited: 34/37 studies (92%) relied solely on internal validation, 9/37 (24%) used formal privacy models, 6/37 (16%) reported explicit fairness evaluations, and 6/37 (16%) addressed regulatory alignment. Few studies distinguished "no-release" from "delayed-release" paradigms. DISCUSSION: A systemic gap exists between methodological innovation and deployment-readiness reporting. Model-based synthetic data show clear value for augmentation and class balancing, but inconsistent reporting of validation, privacy, fairness, and regulatory considerations limits confidence in clinical deployment.
conclusionWe propose TRUST-SD (Transparency and Reporting for Utility, Safety, and Translation of Synthetic Data), an author-derived, preliminary, evidence-informed reporting checklist spanning 7 domains, as a starting point for community refinement and consensus-building.
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.