Cited by 37Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug ReactionsArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationEthics and Social Impacts of AI

Algorithmovigilance, lessons from pharmacovigilance

Open access
Balendran, Alan, Benchoufi, Mehdi, Evgeniou, Theodoros, Ravaud, Philippe·2024·npj Digital Medicine

Abstract

Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems are increasingly being deployed across various high-risk applications, especially in healthcare. Despite significant attention to evaluating these systems, post-deployment incidents are not uncommon, and effective mitigation strategies remain challenging. Drug safety has a well-established history of assessing, monitoring, understanding, and preventing adverse effects in real-world usage, known as pharmacovigilance. Drawing inspiration from pharmacovigilance methods, we discuss concepts that can be adapted for monitoring AI systems in healthcare. This discussion aims to improve responses to adverse effects and potential incidents and risks associated with AI deployment in healthcare but also beyond.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41746-024-01237-y

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Clinicians may ignore alerts, over-trust outputs, misunderstand scores, or use the tool outside its intended scope.

    “Clinicians may ignore alerts, over-trust outputs, misunderstand scores, or use the tool outside its intended scope.”

    From The AI Hospital Formulary: A Practical Governance Framework for Prescribing, Monitoring, and Deprescribing Artificial Intelligence in Hospitals (2026) · cites this paper as [32]

    The Post-approval evaluation section (page unavailable) says human factors, including how clinicians make decisions based on model predictions, matter to AI safety. Causality assessment also identifies operators’ skills and experience as possible contributors to errors. The paper does not specifically describe clinicians ignoring alerts, over-trusting outputs, misunderstanding scores, or using a tool outside its intended scope. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [18]Rabanser, S., Günnemann, S. & Lipton, Z. C. Failing loudly: an empirical study of methods for detecting dataset shift. In Proc. 33rd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 1396–1408 (Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook, NY, USA, 2019).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Balendran, A., Benchoufi, M., Evgeniou, T., & Ravaud, P.
Affiliations
  • Inserm (FR)
  • INSEAD (FR)
Corresponding author
Balendran, Alan
Venue
npj Digital Medicine
Published
2024-10-02
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
270-270
ISSN
2398-6352 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4403048071
Cited by
34
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 4
FWCI
2.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • npj Digital Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Bpifrance
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Keywords
pharmacovigilance, artificial intelligence in healthcare, adverse events, risk mitigation, drug safety

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