ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2026
Artificial intelligence in orthopaedics should be built with surgeons, not just for them!
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surgical artificial intelligence (AI) is typically validated on one patient population and then deployed unchanged into another, without surgeon input into its design. AI in orthopaedics should be built with surgeons, not simply for them: Surgeons should hold shared authority over the clinical question, data curation, validation, implementation, monitoring and retirement of any tool they use. Specialty-tuned models outperform general-purpose systems on some tasks, but the margin is modest and likely to narrow as generalist models improve. The more durable distinction is who controls the update loop-who can retrain a model on local outcomes, audit its failures and withdraw it when it drifts. Trial evidence shows that a clinician kept in that loop by design, not as an afterthought, outperforms working alone. What determines whether orthopaedic AI fulfils its promise is not model architecture, but who stays accountable to the surgeon at the bedside when the model needs to change.
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.