Current Standards of Monitoring Models in Healthcare Settings

The amount of FDA‐approved artificial intelligence and machine learning devices in clinical applications lags drastically behind the vast literature on novel methodologies being developed for healthcare use. Only 3.4% of these approved models have associated predetermined plans for necessary updates. Other regional regulatory organizations, despite most often being decentralized and not as easy to track, do not appear to cover the remaining deficit.The increasingly popular operationalization of deep learning methods in other fields does not seem to be reflected to the same proportion within the medical field. Based on the high‐risk scenarios of medicine, the limited trust and verifiability for most devices are likely to be major obstacles that help explain this gap. Monitoring tools can be implemented to analyze model outcomes by providing a means to reflect on performance and verify results. In this paper, we discuss the current frameworks surrounding device monitoring and highlight what challenges are presented when incorporating model monitoring in the healthcare setting.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Advanced Intelligent Discovery
Published
2026-09-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/aidi.70160
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

Current Standards of Monitoring Models in Healthcare Settings

Gilbert S. Omenn, Kayvan Najarian, Emily Wittrup, Alan Kay et al.
Advanced Intelligent Discovery
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

Current Standards of Monitoring Models in Healthcare Settings

Gilbert S. Omenn, Kayvan Najarian, Emily Wittrup, Alan Kay, Daljit Takher, Wenting Liu
article en

Abstract

The amount of FDA‐approved artificial intelligence and machine learning devices in clinical applications lags drastically behind the vast literature on novel methodologies being developed for healthcare use. Only 3.4% of these approved models have associated predetermined plans for necessary updates. Other regional regulatory organizations, despite most often being decentralized and not as easy to track, do not appear to cover the remaining deficit.The increasingly popular operationalization of deep learning methods in other fields does not seem to be reflected to the same proportion within the medical field. Based on the high‐risk scenarios of medicine, the limited trust and verifiability for most devices are likely to be major obstacles that help explain this gap. Monitoring tools can be implemented to analyze model outcomes by providing a means to reflect on performance and verify results. In this paper, we discuss the current frameworks surrounding device monitoring and highlight what challenges are presented when incorporating model monitoring in the healthcare setting.

Advanced Intelligent Discovery
University of Michigan (US), Michigan Medicine (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
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.