The Application of Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare Practice: An Umbrella Review
Andersen, A.; Huang, R.; Liu, E.
Show abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming healthcare practice, with growing evidence supporting its use in diagnosis, prognosis, treatment planning, and operational decision-making. The proliferation of systematic reviews in recent years underscores the need for an updated synthesis of the literature to inform research, policy, and practice. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, and CINAHL for systematic reviews and meta-analyses published between 2019 and November 2024. Eligible reviews focused on AI applications in healthcare practice, were peer-reviewed, and written in English. A total of 181 reviews met the inclusion criteria. Publication volume increased steadily, peaking in 2024. AI research was concentrated in high-density domains, such as radiology, oncology, and critical care. Across reviews, diagnostic imaging, electronic health record (EHR) data, and biomarkers/laboratory results accounted for 70% of training data sources, though newer data types, such as wearable device and sensor data, emerged from 2022 onward. Diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment comprised over 80% of AI applications, with novel uses emerging in recent years. Ethical concerns were reported in 64.6% of reviews, with privacy, model accuracy, data and algorithmic bias, and explainability as recurrent themes. The proportion of reviews reporting ethical concerns increased from 2021 to 2024. AI applications in healthcare are expanding in scope, diversifying in data sources, and evolving toward novel clinical and operational uses. The human-centered AI or Human-AI-Human paradigm, integrating computational precision with clinical expertise, holds significant promise but will require parallel advances in governance, regulatory frameworks, and ethical oversight to ensure safe adoption. Article highlightsO_LIThis umbrella review summarizes 181 systematic reviews on AI applications across healthcare practice fields. C_LIO_LI70% of the reviews reported AI models trained on diagnostic imaging, EHR, and biomarker data. C_LIO_LIThere has been recent growth in AI using wearable, sensor, and other health data. C_LIO_LIDiagnosis, prognosis, and treatment comprised over 80% of the applications in all the reviews. C_LIO_LIEthical concerns, including privacy, accuracy, bias, and explainability, were raised in over half of the reviews. C_LI
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Development and preliminary testing of Health Equity Across the AI Lifecycle (HEAAL): A framework for healthcare delivery organizations to mitigate the risk of AI solutions worsening health inequities 95%
- Theory of radiologist interaction with instant messaging decision support tools: a sequential-explanatory study 95%
- The NASSS (Non-Adoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread and Sustainability) framework use over time: A scoping review 94%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Connecting Artificial Intelligence and Primary Care Challenges: Findings from a Multi-Stakeholder Collaborative Consultation 95%
- Measures of socioeconomic advantage are not independent predictors of support for healthcare AI: subgroup analysis of a national Australian survey 94%
- Impact of the Federated Data Platform's digital surgery scheduling system on elective theatre utilisation at an NHS Trust: an interrupted time series analysis 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Synthetic Data Generation in Healthcare: A Scoping Review of reviews on domains, motivations, and future applications 96%
- Development and Evaluation of MADDIE: Method to Acquire Delivery Date Information from Electronic Health Records 94%
- Digital applications to support self-management of multimorbidity: A scoping review 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.