The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Pragmatic Approaches to the Evaluation and Monitoring of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care: A Science Advisory From the American Heart Association
Abstract
The rapid development and integration of artificial intelligence (AI), including predictive, generative, and emerging agentic tools, into cardiovascular and stroke care is outpacing traditional evaluation frameworks and the generation of robust clinical evidence. This science advisory addresses the urgent need for pragmatic, risk-proportionate approaches to the evaluation and monitoring of health care AI. AI implementation practices often rely on real-world or anecdotal evidence, with considerable variability in local validation, bias assessment, and postdeployment monitoring. Several evaluation frameworks exist, but they can be difficult to operationalize, especially outside of well-resourced health systems. We propose and discuss evaluation across 3 phases: predeployment, implementation, and postdeployment. We also provide 4 pragmatic guiding principles for health systems that are beginning to set up AI governance processes, including strategic alignment, ethical evaluation, usefulness and effectiveness evaluation, and financial performance, to inform health system selection, validation, deployment, and actionable monitoring of AI tools. The American Heart Association's extensive hospital and volunteer network and commitment to evidence-based practice position it as a trusted leader in advancing responsible AI governance. By grounding evaluation and monitoring in these principles, this science advisory aims to ensure that AI adoption in health care is safe, effective, equit…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
Recent AHA recommendations emphasise four guiding principles: alignment with organisational strategic priorities, ethical design and use, demonstrable usefulness and effectiveness and sustainable financial performance.
“Recent AHA recommendations emphasise four guiding principles: alignment with organisational strategic priorities, ethical design and use, demonstrable usefulness and effectiveness and sustainable financial performance.68”
From Prognostication and clinical opportunities with AI for coronary artery calcium: a scoping review (2026) · cites this paper as [68]
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 38 · Cited by 23
Research works printed but not linked: 25
- 10.1038/s41591-023-02448-8 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.jacc.2024.03.400 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jacc.2024.05.003 · DOI
- 10.1038/s41746-022-00611-y · DOI · Paper page
- American Medical Association. How to develop AI policies that work for your organization’s needs. Accessed October 16 2025. https://www.ama-assn.org/practice-management/digital-health/how-develop-ai-policies-work-your-organization-s-needs
- 10.1377/hlthaff.2024.00842 · DOI · Paper page
- Utilization Review Accreditation Commission. Artificial intelligence in health care. Accessed October 15 2025. https://www.urac.org/accreditation-cert/healthcareai
- 10.1001/jama.2024.21700 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/jamia/ocae043 · DOI
- 10.1001/jama.2024.21772 · DOI
- 10.1001/jama.2024.3620 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.03.006 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3390/jcm14010286 · DOI
- 10.1038/s41591-019-0651-8 · DOI
- 10.1038/s41591-024-03203-3 · DOI
- 10.1056/aipc2500163 · DOI
- 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2025.5020 · DOI
- 10.1056/NEJMsb2503956 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000022 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1001/jama.2020.12067 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1186/s41512-024-00184-2 · DOI
- 10.1056/NEJMp2406135 · DOI
- 10.1056/aip2500651 · DOI
- 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2025.1692 · DOI
- 10.1001/jama.2025.18490 · DOI · Paper page
Metadata
- Authors
- Jain, S. S., Goto, S., Hall, J. L., Khan, S. S., MacRae, C. A., Ofori, C., Pegus, C., Pencina, M., Peterson, E. D., Schwamm, L. H., & on behalf of the Council on Clinical Cardiology; Stroke Council, C. O. Q. O. C. A. O. R. C. O. C. A. S. N. A. C. O. L. C. H. D. A. H. H. I. T. Y.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Circulation
- Published
- 2025-12-09
- Volume
- 152
- Issue
- 23
- Pages
- e433-e442
- ISSN
- 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4539
- OpenAlex
- W4416093630
- Cited by
- 23
- References
- 38
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23
- FWCI
- 1.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- correction (2026-02-23)
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Circulation (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence in healthcare, AI evaluation framework, post-deployment monitoring, AI governance, cardiovascular care, stroke care, generative AI, agentic AI, AI validation, American Heart Association
- MeSH terms
- American Heart Association, Artificial Intelligence, Cardiovascular Diseases, Delivery of Health Care, Humans, Patient Care Management, Quality of Health Care, United States
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