Search PubMed⌕ Search

subject

Decision Support Systems, Clinical

Decision Support Systems, Clinical: explore 2 source-linked works published from 2026 to 2026, with original documents and citations.

This collection is a preview while coverage and quality are evaluated.

Search within this collection

Coverage and selection

Includes records with this source-supplied label or an explicit phrase match in their metadata. Matches indicate a mention, not proof that a paper uses a method or tests a material. Source versions are consolidated by DOI.

Sources: pubmed. Collection updated 2026-10-09. Counts describe this index, not the complete source archives.

PubMed2026

An AI-assisted Clinical Decision Support System for Green Classification of Cystocele on Dynamic Transperineal Ultrasound.

Green classification of cystocele on dynamic transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) remains operator-dependent because it requires manual frame selection and landmark-based assessment of the Valsalva maneuver. We developed a workflow-oriented AI-assisted clinical decision support system for automated urethrovesical junction localization and dynamic Green classification and prospectively evaluated its standalone and reader-support performance. This diagnostic accuracy and reader study included 881 patients from a tertiary referral hospital, comprising a retrospective development cohort (n = 688) and an independent prospective test cohort (n = 193). A nested subset of 67 prospective patients was used for a reader study involving two junior and two intermediate radiologists under unaided and AI-assisted conditions. In the complete prospective test cohort, Green-AttGRU achieved a macro-averaged AUC of 0.939 (95% CI, 0.897-0.971) and an overall accuracy of 0.902 (95% CI, 0.860-0.943). In the reader study, overall accuracy increased from 0.761 to 0.821 without AI to 0.851-0.881 with AI, while macro-F1 increased from 0.660 to 0.777 to 0.820-0.860. Overall inter-reader agreement increased from a Fleiss' κ of 0.453 to 0.786, and pooled median interpretation time decreased from 26.7 s to 9.9 s. These findings support the preliminary feasibility of the system as a workflow-oriented decision-support tool for dynamic TPUS interpretation.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Data-centric, robust, and explainable multimodal deep learning for clinical decision support: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: Multimodal deep learning is increasingly proposed for clinical decision support (CDS) under a "data-centric" framing that prioritizes label quality, missing-modality robustness, distribution shift, calibration, and explainability. Prior reviews have examined multimodal medical AI, CDS, and data-centric methods separately, but none address their intersection. We mapped the modalities, fusion strategies, and data-centric and explainability techniques used in this recent literature, quantified how often each is implemented rather than merely mentioned, assessed deployment-relevant evidence (external validation, clinical-outcome measurement, equity), and formally appraised study-level risk of bias. METHODS: Following the PRISMA 2020 statement (PROSPERO CRD420261427815; registered retrospectively), we screened 150 records and included primary, clinical, multimodal studies that applied machine or deep learning to a decision-support task and reported at least one quantitative result. Two reviewers screened and extracted data with consensus adjudication. Each study was coded against pre-specified operational definitions, separating implemented or empirically evaluated techniques from those only mentioned. Study-level risk of bias was assessed with PROBAST + AI. Synthesis was narrative. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies met inclusion; 30 (97%) were published between 2024 and 2026, with a median of three modalities (range 2-6), most commonly structured EHR (71%) and imaging (39%). Data-centric techniques were frequently reported (74-84% across label-noise, distribution-shift, calibration, missing-modality and class-imbalance handling; equity 61%). However, external validation was reported in only 4/31 studies (13%), a clinical or provider outcome in 3/31 (10%), and no study reported routine deployment. Overall risk of bias was high in 27/31 studies (87%), driven by the analysis domain. CONCLUSION: Within this recent, self-selected slice of the field, technical robustness and explainability techniques are widely reported but rarely validated out-of-distribution or against clinical outcomes, and the underlying evidence is at high risk of bias. Progress requires external multi-site validation, clinical-outcome measurement, formal bias appraisal, and adherence to AI reporting standards (e.g., TRIPOD + AI) before deployment can be justified.

Deep Learning↗
Compare source metadata on this page
WorkPublishedSource identifierSource
An AI-assisted Clinical Decision Support System for Green Classification of Cystocele on Dynamic Transperineal Ultrasound.2026-09-01PMID 42678584pubmed
Data-centric, robust, and explainable multimodal deep learning for clinical decision support: A systematic review.2026-08-26PMID 42667902pubmed

These are bibliographic comparisons, not experimental rankings. Follow the original document for methods and conditions.