Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42860029›Full record

ReviewCancer medicine2026

Advancing Patient-Centred AI With Adaptive Machine Learning.

Dimitrios Kalogeropoulos, Paul Barach, Andrea Downing, Stefaan Verhulst, Maryam Lustberg

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer medicine, 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

5 authors.

Dimitrios KalogeropoulosGlobal Health & Digital Innovation Foundation, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2765-8326
Paul BarachSchool of Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7906-698X
Andrea DowningThe Light Collective, Eugene, Oregon, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8401-8686
Stefaan VerhulstThe GovLab, New York University, New York, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0107-2984
Maryam LustbergYale Cancer Center, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8559-5645

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Healthcare services and data ecosystems remain fragmented, inequitable and misaligned with patient, clinician and public health needs. Three pathways to patient-centred Artificial Intelligence (AI) have emerged to address this: data collaboration, Whole System Approaches and digital inclusion. Each has advanced the field. However, none delivers the continuous, participatory and outcome-grounded learning that equitable AI demands. The populations whose data drives AI learning must also be the populations who benefit from it. This principle has not been structurally embedded in any existing pathway. This narrative review defines a framework for operationalising Adaptive Machine Learning (AML) as a fourth, integrative pathway to patient-centred AI. AML is defined as continuous learning from real-world individual-level data to generate personalised, population-level insights returning direct benefit to the communities who produce them. A narrative review of PubMed and Google Scholar (2018-2025) was conducted across five thematic domains: AI and machine learning in healthcare; real-world data and evidence; patient-centred care and digital health; data governance and AI regulation; and adaptive clinical trial design. Search terms covered healthcare AI applications and adaptive, continuously learning systems, emphasising prediction-oriented rather than static diagnostic approaches. Eligibility was determined through iterative thematic analysis. Eight systemic barriers to patient-centred AI are identified and the three existing pathways critically examined for limitations in addressing bias, validation and equitable implementation. AML is proposed as the mechanism that closes this gap, connecting systems medicine, personalised medicine and precision medicine through continuous, outcome-based learning, identifying three original conceptual contributions as enablers: Integrative Data Governance (IDG), Adaptive Clinical Trial (ACT) designs and Evidence Sandbox Facilities (ESFs). Progress requires globally standardised Healthcare Data Recycling frameworks, adaptive evaluation methodologies and ESFs enabling multi-stakeholder validation. Future research should address federated AML validation, collective consent mechanisms and alignment of regulatory frameworks with international AI governance standards.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceMachine LearningPatient-Centered CareDigital HealthHumansPrecision Medicineartificial intelligencegovernancemachine learningpatient‐centred carestandardisation

Identifiers

PMID42860029
PMCPMC13654484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.