Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42341297›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026

Enhancing Physician Resilience to Generative AI: Multilevel Framework for Shared Authority, Verification, and Skill Preservation.

Hongxia Pan, Jialin Liu, Siru Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Hongxia PanRehabilitation Medicine Center and Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2215-525X
Jialin LiuDepartment of Medical Informatics, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Guoxue Xiang Street, Chengdu, Sichuan, 610041, China, 86 28-85422416.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1369-4625
Siru LiuDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5003-5354

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Unlabelled: As generative artificial intelligence (AI), particularly large language model-based tools, is increasingly integrated into diagnosis, triage, decision support, and treatment planning, it offers potential gains in efficiency and information access. However, real-world deployment also introduces important risks, including hallucinations, miscalibrated confidence, automation bias, and increased verification burden on physicians. This burden may divert attention from independent clinical reasoning, contribute to deskilling, and increase vulnerability when models fail silently or perform poorly in unfamiliar clinical contexts. Existing AI governance frameworks emphasize data quality, transparency, accountability, and ethical deployment, but pay less attention to physician-facing resilience, defined in this paper as the capacity to sustain independent and safe clinical judgment when collaborating with generative AI. In this viewpoint, we propose a multilevel governance framework organized around 3 coordinated domains: cognitive workload shaping, clinical authority governance and allocation, and organizational safety governance and accountability. Together, these domains aim to reduce verification burden, preserve physician decisional authority, and align institutional oversight with safe and context-sensitive AI use. The framework includes mechanisms such as risk-sensitive verification triggers, bounded delegation, structured interprofessional review, and organizational monitoring to support safe clinical integration while minimizing avoidable workflow disruption. At the same time, implementation may be limited by workflow friction, alert fatigue, variable institutional resources, and the need for ongoing monitoring and recalibration to ensure that safeguards remain clinically useful rather than burdensome. Accordingly, this paper outlines a structured governance framework to guide safer integration of generative AI into clinical care and inform future evaluation across specialties, workflows, and institutional settings.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceClinical CompetencePhysiciansGenerative Artificial IntelligenceHumansLarge Language ModelsaccountabilityAIartificial intelligenceauthorityclinical safetycognitive loadgenerative AIgenerative artificial intelligencephysician

Identifiers

PMID42341297
PMCPMC13293561

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.