Cited by 60Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationMachine Learning in HealthcareSafety Systems Engineering in Autonomy

Rethinking clinical trials for medical AI with dynamic deployments of adaptive systems

Open access
Rosenthal, Jacob T., Beecy, Ashley, Sabuncu, Mert R.·2025·npj Digital Medicine

Abstract

There is a growing recognition of the need for clinical trials to safely and effectively deploy artificial intelligence (AI) in clinical settings. We introduce dynamic deployment as a framework for AI clinical trials tailored for the dynamic nature of large language models, making possible complex medical AI systems which continuously learn and adapt in situ from new data and interactions with users while enabling continuous real-time monitoring and clinical validation.

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/s41746-025-01674-3

Cites

55 of 55 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. [4]Dhawan, N., Cotta, L., Ullrich, K., Krishnan, R. G. & Maddison, C. J. End-To-End Causal Effect Estimation from Unstructured Natural Language Data. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems vol. 37, 77165–77199 (Curran Associates, Inc., 2024).
  2. [28]1. Rafailov, R. et al. Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model. in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (eds. Oh, A. et al.) vol. 36, 53728–53741 (Curran Associates, Inc., 2023).
  3. [29]1. Dong, H. et al. RLHF Workflow: From Reward Modeling to Online RLHF. Transactions on Machine Learning Research (2024).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rosenthal, J. T., Beecy, A., & Sabuncu, M. R.
Affiliations
  • Weill Cornell Medicine (US)
  • Cornell University (US)
Corresponding author
Rosenthal, Jacob T.
Venue
npj Digital Medicine
Published
2025-05-06
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
252-252
ISSN
2398-6352 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4410111118
Cited by
59
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 41 · 2025: 18
FWCI
3.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • npj Digital Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM152349)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Safety Systems Engineering in Autonomy
Keywords
clinical trials, artificial intelligence in healthcare, dynamic deployment, adaptive systems, large language models, continuous learning, real-time monitoring, clinical validation, AI 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