Cited by 59Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence ApplicationsEthics and Social Impacts of AI

Clinical trials informed framework for real world clinical implementation and deployment of artificial intelligence applications

Open access
You, Jacqueline G., Hernandez-Boussard, Tina, Pfeffer, Michael A., Landman, Adam, Mishuris, Rebecca G.·2025·npj Digital Medicine

Abstract

With rapidly evolving artificial intelligence solutions, healthcare organizations need an implementation roadmap. A "clinical trials" informed approach can promote safe and impactful implementation of artificial intelligence. This framework includes four phases: (1) Safety; (2) Efficacy; (3) Effectiveness and comparison to an existing standard; and (4) Monitoring. Combined with inter-institutional collaboration and national funding support, this approach will advance safe, usable, effective, and equitable deployments of artificial intelligence in healthcare.

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/s41746-025-01506-4

Cites

33 of 33 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?

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: 3

  1. [5]Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, Department of Health and Human Services. Health Data, Technology, and Interoperability: Certification Program Updates, Algorithm Transparency, and Information Sharing. 45 CFR §170, 171 (2024).
  2. [9]Li, F., Ruijs, N. & Lu, Y. Ethics & AI: A systematic review on ethical concerns and related strategies for designing with AI in. Healthc. AI 4, 28–53 (2023).
  3. [34]Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US). Criteria for Distinguishing Effectiveness from Efficacy Trials in Systematic Reviews. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK44029/ (2006). 20734508

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
You, J. G., Hernandez-Boussard, T., Pfeffer, M. A., Landman, A., & Mishuris, R. G.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
You, Jacqueline G.
Venue
npj Digital Medicine
Published
2025-02-17
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
107-107
ISSN
2398-6352 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4407633448
Cited by
59
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 46 · 2025: 13
FWCI
3.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • npj Digital Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. National Library of Medicine (T15LM007092)
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR003142)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Keywords
artificial intelligence in healthcare, clinical implementation, AI safety, effectiveness, monitoring, implementation roadmap, inter-institutional collaboration, national funding

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