ReviewBreathe (Sheffield, England)2026
Digital health and artificial intelligence in paediatric respiratory medicine: what clinicians need to know and what is coming next.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital health and artificial intelligence (AI) are increasingly part of paediatric respiratory clinics, from home-based symptom monitoring and remote consultations to AI-supported test interpretation and large language model (LLM)-supported communication. These tools promise to capture real-world disease and treatment patterns, support self-management, and enhance clinical decisions. Yet for most of these tools, the paediatric evidence base remains limited and fragmented, and the clinical benefit observed in practice is often modest. What has emerged is that effectiveness depends less on the technology itself than on how it fits into the child-parent-clinician triad, on its usability in daily family life, and on its impact on clinical workflow and on equity. Paediatric datasets remain small, heterogeneous and developmental, making extrapolation from adult evidence risky. Over the next 3 years, progress is likely to consolidate rather than expand, with paediatric-specific validation, regulation and routine integration. Clinicians will play a central role: deciding what to adopt, what to question, and what to govern.
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.