ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026
Enhancing Physician Resilience to Generative AI: Multilevel Framework for Shared Authority, Verification, and Skill Preservation.
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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rethinking AI in clinical decision support: a framework for reciprocal human-AI interaction.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- From risk classification to clinical action: a prespecified paired pilot benchmark of public large language model interfaces for diabetes-related foot ulcer prevention.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.