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 highlights
This umbrella review summarizes 181 systematic reviews on AI applications across healthcare practice fields.
70% of the reviews reported AI models trained on diagnostic imaging, EHR, and biomarker data.
There has been recent growth in AI using wearable, sensor, and other health data.
Diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment comprised over 80% of the applications in all the reviews.
Ethical concerns, including privacy, accuracy, bias, and explainability, were raised in over half of the reviews.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵# Coauthors
rhuang26{at}uic.edu, jiusiliu{at}gmail.com
One missing reference and updates to an author's contact information.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
