AI in Long-Term Care: A Closed-Loop Sociotechnical Reliability Framework

AI is increasingly used in long-term care (LTC), yet reliability is often judged at the level of individual models or devices. This is insufficient in LTC, where residents vary in capacity, autonomy, and preferences. Their ability to question AI outputs may fluctuate, and care delivery depends on distributed roles and finite operational capacity. We define sociotechnical reliability as the capacity of an AI-enabled care system to consistently translate resident-relevant information into appropriate and timely care actions under real-world LTC conditions, with failures that are detectable and correctable across the care pathway. In this Viewpoint, we draw on professional experience overseeing AI initiatives across LTC and hospital settings, examined in relation to a purposively mapped interdisciplinary literature, to inform the development of a reliability framework. Our aim is to reframe AI reliability in LTC as an end-to-end care system property and to provide a framework for identifying where reliability is gained, lost, and evaluated. We propose 5 reliability functions: sensing, inference, verification and contextualization, response and escalation, and learning and adaptation, with governance and accountability operating across all 5 functions. The framework highlights recurrent failures, including incomplete sensing, nonportable inference, overreliance on or dismissal of AI outputs during verification, unclear ownership or delayed response, and repeated failures without correction. The framework also makes reliability empirically examinable through questions about where the pathway fails, who has the authority to verify and act, whether response demands are sustainable within available capacity, and whether failures become visible to governance and inform learning and adaptation. Our central viewpoint is that AI in LTC should be judged not by model performance alone but by whether the surrounding care system can reliably translate AI-generated information into care.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2026-10-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2196/105161
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

AI in Long-Term Care: A Closed-Loop Sociotechnical Reliability Framework

Jin‐Young Min, Kyoung‐Bok Min
2 links
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

AI in Long-Term Care: A Closed-Loop Sociotechnical Reliability Framework

Jin‐Young Min, Kyoung‐Bok Min
article en

Abstract

AI is increasingly used in long-term care (LTC), yet reliability is often judged at the level of individual models or devices. This is insufficient in LTC, where residents vary in capacity, autonomy, and preferences. Their ability to question AI outputs may fluctuate, and care delivery depends on distributed roles and finite operational capacity. We define sociotechnical reliability as the capacity of an AI-enabled care system to consistently translate resident-relevant information into appropriate and timely care actions under real-world LTC conditions, with failures that are detectable and correctable across the care pathway. In this Viewpoint, we draw on professional experience overseeing AI initiatives across LTC and hospital settings, examined in relation to a purposively mapped interdisciplinary literature, to inform the development of a reliability framework. Our aim is to reframe AI reliability in LTC as an end-to-end care system property and to provide a framework for identifying where reliability is gained, lost, and evaluated. We propose 5 reliability functions: sensing, inference, verification and contextualization, response and escalation, and learning and adaptation, with governance and accountability operating across all 5 functions. The framework highlights recurrent failures, including incomplete sensing, nonportable inference, overreliance on or dismissal of AI outputs during verification, unclear ownership or delayed response, and repeated failures without correction. The framework also makes reliability empirically examinable through questions about where the pathway fails, who has the authority to verify and act, whether response demands are sustainable within available capacity, and whether failures become visible to governance and inform learning and adaptation. Our central viewpoint is that AI in LTC should be judged not by model performance alone but by whether the surrounding care system can reliably translate AI-generated information into care.

Journal of Medical Internet ResearchVol. 28
Seoul National University (KR), Kongju National University (KR)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 20%
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.

Laika access coming soon