Cited by 1,171Machine Learning in HealthcareArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Machine Learning and Prediction in Medicine — Beyond the Peak of Inflated Expectations

Open access
Chen, Jonathan H., Asch, Steven M.·2017·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

Big data, we have all heard, promise to transform health care. But in the “hype cycle” of emerging technologies, machine learning now rides atop the “peak of inflated expectations,” and we need to better appreciate the technology’s capabilities and limitations.

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 · 10.1056/nejmp1702071

Cites

4 of 4 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?

  • Deployment strategies themselves constitute a major and underexamined source of risk in real-world clinical AI use.

    “However, accumulating evidence indicates that deployment strategies themselves constitute a major and underexamined source of risk in real world clinical AI use [1, 4].”

    From Adaptive FHIR Native AI Governance for Clinical Decision Support: A Modular, Auditable Deployment Framework for Real World Clinical AI (2026) · cites this paper as [1]

    In the main text (page unavailable), Chen and Asch call the last mile of clinical implementation critical and explain that accurate predictions may not improve care unless they inform a timely intervention. This supports concern about real-world use, but the paper does not identify deployment strategies themselves as a major, underexamined source of risk or describe accumulating evidence for that claim. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Many deployed clinical AI systems fail to deliver sustained benefit in routine clinical care despite strong retrospective performance.

    “Despite strong retrospective performance, many deployed systems fail to deliver sustained benefit in routine clinical care [1, 2].”

    From Adaptive FHIR Native AI Governance for Clinical Decision Support: A Modular, Auditable Deployment Framework for Real World Clinical AI (2026) · cites this paper as [1]

    In the main text (page not provided), the paper says that even a perfectly calibrated prediction model may not improve clinical care and that historical performance is not enough to establish future usefulness. It does not report that many deployed systems have failed to deliver sustained benefit in routine care. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Failures of clinical AI systems frequently stem from static and opaque deployment strategies rather than deficiencies in predictive models themselves.

    “Clinical AI failures often arise from static and opaque deployment strategies rather than deficiencies in predictive models themselves.”

    From Adaptive FHIR Native AI Governance for Clinical Decision Support: A Modular, Auditable Deployment Framework for Real World Clinical AI (2026) · cites this paper as [1]

    In the main text (page unavailable), the paper says that even a perfectly calibrated model may not improve care and that the 'last mile' of clinical implementation is critical. It also warns that historical clinical data rapidly lose relevance. These passages support concerns about implementation and static approaches, but they do not identify opaque deployment strategies or establish that such strategies are a frequent cause of clinical AI failures rather than model deficiencies. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The first requirement for the successful development of multimodal data-enabled applications is the collection, curation and harmonization of well-phenotyped and large annotated datasets, as no amount of technical sophistication can derive information not present in the data.

    “The first requirement for the successful development of multimodal data-enabled applications is the collection, curation and harmonization of well-phenotyped and large annotated datasets, as no amount of technical sophistication can derive information not present in the data 80 .”

    From Multimodal biomedical AI (2022) · cites this paper as [80]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, J. H., & Asch, S. M.
Affiliations
VA Palo Alto Health Care System (US)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2017-06-29
Volume
376
Issue
26
Pages
2507-2509
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2727650337
Cited by
1,171
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 123 · 2025: 177 · 2024: 122 · 2023: 115 · 2022: 130 · 2021: 146 · 2020: 129 · 2019: 107 · 2018: 105 · 2017: 15 · 2012: 1
FWCI
58.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (K01ES026837)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
machine learning, medical prediction, big data, health care, hype cycle, technology limitations, clinical decision support
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Algorithms, Probability, Prognosis, Risk Assessment

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