The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Epistemic humility for physicians and scientists
Open accessAbstract
A renewed focus on epistemology—the study of how knowledge is constructed and validated—is essential for addressing the challenges of 21st-century science. Central to this is cultivating epistemic humility in the training of future scientists and physicians in order to revitalize the scientific method at a time when it is urgently needed to confront global challenges such as climate change, pandemics, and the ethical development of artificial intelligence.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Even among regulated AI products, available evidence and disclosure are often insufficient to assess for bias and/or accuracy.
“Even among regulated AI products, available evidence and disclosure are often insufficient to assess for bias and/or accuracy, underscoring the need for competency in the critical appraisal of resources19,20.”
From What the AI era doctor should know: a scoping review of proposed artificial intelligence competencies for medical education (2026) · cites this paper as [19]
In “Epistemic humility for physicians and scientists” (page unavailable), the paper says AI can inherit bias from training data and emphasizes critical thinking. It does not discuss regulated AI products or say that their evidence and disclosures are often insufficient to assess bias or accuracy. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The spread of true and false news online
Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aap9559 · Cited by 8,847
The effect of seeing scientists as intellectually humble on trust in scientists and their research
Koetke, J., Schumann, K., Bowes, S. M., & Vaupotič, N. (2024) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-024-02060-x · Cited by 30
Celi, L. A. (2025) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-025-04013-x · Cited by 6
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hunt, V. M., Sprehe, L. K., de Lomba, W. C., Gameiro, R. R., Woite, N. L., Wade, C. G., Chen, J. H., Rougas, S. C., Fraser, H. S. F., Sullivan, A. M., et al. (2026) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-026-02761-9 · Cited by 10
Turky, M., & Abbott, P. V. (2026) · Australian Endodontic Journal · doi:10.1111/aej.70097 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Celi, L. A., Dorotic, M., Dubin, J., Nazarian, N., & Salarikia, R.
- Affiliations
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
- Boston Medical Center (US)
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- Shiraz University (IR)
- Corresponding author
- Celi, Leo Anthony
- Dubin, Joseph
- Nazarian, Noushin
- Salarikia, Reza
- ORCID
- Celi, Leo Anthony
- Venue
- The Lancet Regional Health - Americas
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2026-01
- Volume
- 53
- Pages
- 101315
- ISSN
- 2667-193X (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC12681921
- OpenAlex
- W4416534275
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1
- FWCI
- 7.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- The Lancet Regional Health - Americas (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
- Keywords
- epistemic humility, epistemology, scientific method, medical education, science education, knowledge construction, knowledge validation, climate change, pandemic, AI ethics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
