Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42393862›Full record

ArticleAnnals of neurology2026

Five Issues of Artificial Intelligence in Science: Sailing the Ship of Theseus.

S Thomas Carmichael

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

S Thomas CarmichaelDepartment of Neurology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1169-9203

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming part of the working infrastructure of academic medicine. Because grants convert scientific ideas into protected time, infrastructure, and institutional priority, they provide a revealing test case for AI's effects on biomedicine. Five issues are emerging: language, agency, review, doership, and identity. AI can polish weak proposals, shift the origin of ideas, align proposal and review language around fundability, and create feasibility theater, projects that sound executable, but exceed a laboratory's capacity. The challenge is to keep AI anchored to lived expertise, the experience of failure, and the formative work by which faculty become scientists. ANN NEUROL 2026;100:453-457.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceAcademiaHumans

Identifiers

PMID42393862
PMCPMC13495842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.