From Algorithm to Bedside: A Clinician's Framework for AI in Practice

Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI) is entering clinical practice faster than the evidence base supporting it. Clinicians, who remain the licensed decision-makers at the bedside, increasingly find themselves as end-users of tools whose strengths, failure modes, and external validity they have had no opportunity to assess. This article offers a practical framework that does not require coding or mathematical literacy. We outline how AI is built, validated, deployed, and monitored, and where each phase typically goes wrong. We propose seven questions that clinicians can run through to evaluate any clinical AI tool in the time it takes to read an abstract, alongside a traffic-light schema for matching oversight to risk and a short list of demands clinicians should make of vendors and institutions. We then examine the deeper questions of equity, accountability, and the therapeutic relationship that AI is now forcing into view. AI literacy belongs alongside biostatistics and evidence-based medicine as a core clinical competency.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Avicenna Journal of Medicine
Published
2026-08-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0046-1827198
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

From Algorithm to Bedside: A Clinician's Framework for AI in Practice

Fares Alahdab, Mohammad Alkhateeb, Abdullah Al-Marrawi, Alaa Abdelqader et al.
Avicenna Journal of Medicine
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

From Algorithm to Bedside: A Clinician's Framework for AI in Practice

Fares Alahdab, Mohammad Alkhateeb, Abdullah Al-Marrawi, Alaa Abdelqader, Hadi Baianonie
article en

Abstract

Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI) is entering clinical practice faster than the evidence base supporting it. Clinicians, who remain the licensed decision-makers at the bedside, increasingly find themselves as end-users of tools whose strengths, failure modes, and external validity they have had no opportunity to assess. This article offers a practical framework that does not require coding or mathematical literacy. We outline how AI is built, validated, deployed, and monitored, and where each phase typically goes wrong. We propose seven questions that clinicians can run through to evaluate any clinical AI tool in the time it takes to read an abstract, alongside a traffic-light schema for matching oversight to risk and a short list of demands clinicians should make of vendors and institutions. We then examine the deeper questions of equity, accountability, and the therapeutic relationship that AI is now forcing into view. AI literacy belongs alongside biostatistics and evidence-based medicine as a core clinical competency.

Avicenna Journal of Medicine
University of Applied Sciences Utrecht (NL), Baylor College of Medicine (US), Utrecht University (NL), Brightwood College (US), University of Missouri (US), Alexandria University (EG)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.