ReviewBreathe (Sheffield, England)2026
Artificial intelligence and digital health in bronchoscopy: advances in diagnostic accuracy, real-time navigation and procedural skills training.
Review in Breathe (Sheffield, England), 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) and procedure-linked digital health technologies are beginning to transform bronchoscopy across three interconnected domains. In terms of diagnostic accuracy, deep learning models applied to endobronchial ultrasound images and bronchoscopic videos can match or exceed human readers in differentiating benign from malignant lesions, although nearly all evidence remains at the level of test-accuracy metrics rather than clinical outcomes. In real-time navigation, AI-augmented fluoroscopy and tomosynthesis platforms represent the clearest example of clinically deployed AI that improves lesion localisation and diagnostic yield for peripheral pulmonary nodules, while camera-based localisation and shared-control robotic systems remain largely preclinical. In training, multiple randomised controlled trials demonstrate that AI-guided simulators significantly improve performance across experience levels, and that AI-derived metrics can objectively assess competence, although the first attempt to show impact on real-world clinical performance was inconclusive. This review synthesises the current literature across these three domains, distinguishing technologies that are currently used in clinical practice with supportive published evidence from those that remain investigational. It provides practising bronchoscopists and trainees with a balanced appraisal of what AI can realistically offer today, what limitations persist, and what developments are likely over the coming decade.
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.