Cited by 36Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationGut microbiota and healthArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

AI in microbiome‐related healthcare

Open access
Probul, Niklas, Huang, Zihua, Saak, Christina Caroline, Baumbach, Jan, List, Markus·2024·Microbial Biotechnology

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to transform clinical practice and healthcare. Following impressive advancements in fields such as computer vision and medical imaging, AI is poised to drive changes in microbiome-based healthcare while facing challenges specific to the field. This review describes the state-of-the-art use of AI in microbiome-related healthcare. It points out limitations across topics such as data handling, AI modelling and safeguarding patient privacy. Furthermore, we indicate how these current shortcomings could be overcome in the future and discuss the influence and opportunities of increasingly complex data on microbiome-based 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 · 10.1111/1751-7915.70027

Cites

109 of 109 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?

  • AI-based forecasts still require careful experimental and clinical verification to ensure human safety due to the lack of a unified validation system for methods.

    “Despite their potential, AI-based forecasts still require careful experimental and clinical verification to ensure human safety due to the lack of a unified validation system for methods [173].”

    From Current Concepts in Probiotic Safety and Efficacy (2026) · cites this paper as [173]

    The ‘Current limitations and future perspectives’ section says that few AI models have reached clinical application, often because they lack independent validation, and calls for independent test data. It does not say that there is no unified validation system or specifically require experimental and clinical verification to ensure human safety. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • AI solutions demand standardized datasets, transparent reporting, and interpretable models to mitigate overfitting risks and address ethical concerns.

    “Despite these transformative capabilities, AI solutions demand standardized datasets (including standardized sample collection and processing), transparent reporting, and interpretable models to mitigate overfitting risks and address ethical concerns (Probul et al., 2024).”

    From Microbiota-centered interventions to boost immune checkpoint blockade therapies (2025) · cites this paper as Probul et al., 2024

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: 2

  1. Asad, M., Moustafa, A.M.I. & Ito, T. (2020) Federated learning versus classical machine learning: a convergence comparison. In The 15th International Conference on Knowledge, Information and Creativity Support Systems (KICSS 2020), Tasmania, Australia (Online), 25‐27 November 2020. unknown.
  2. Liu, J., Yang, M., Yu, Y., Xu, H., Li, K. & Zhou, X. (2024) Large language models in bioinformatics: applications and perspectives. ArXiv, January. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10802675/.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Probul, N., Huang, Z., Saak, C. C., Baumbach, J., & List, M.
Affiliations
  • Universität Hamburg (DE)
  • Technical University of Munich (DE)
Corresponding author
Baumbach, Jan
Venue
Microbial Biotechnology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2024-11
Volume
17
Issue
11
Pages
e70027-e70027
ISSN
1751-7915 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4404004411
Cited by
36
References
109
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 16
FWCI
0.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Microbial Biotechnology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (01IS21079)
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (395357507)
  • China Scholarship Council
  • HORIZON EUROPE Framework Programme (101079777)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
artificial intelligence, clinical microbiology, diagnostic imaging, computer vision, patient privacy
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Delivery of Health Care, Humans, Microbiota

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