ReviewCureus2026
Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Hospital Quality Management, Patient Safety, and Accreditation Readiness: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As healthcare systems become increasingly data-driven, artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are being explored as tools to support quality management, patient safety, and accreditation. This systematic review synthesizes the available evidence across these domains through a structured literature search of major biomedical databases, encompassing studies published over the past decade and narratively synthesized to capture implementation context alongside technical performance. Three electronic databases were searched, and 23 studies were included. The available empirical evidence suggests that these technologies are most useful for repetitive, operationally well-defined, and digitally captured tasks, while local validation, acceptance testing, and continuous monitoring consistently emerge as prerequisites for safe institutional deployment. Governance capacity and organizational readiness are identified as equally determinative of outcomes as algorithmic performance itself. Collectively, the evidence supports positioning AI and ML as augmentative instruments within human-led quality governance structures, rather than as autonomous operational systems. Evidence was heterogeneous, with most empirical studies being single-center, retrospective, or implementation-focused. The risk-of-bias assessment indicated limited high-quality comparative evidence, limiting the strength of the pooled conclusions.
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.