Jul 2026· Journal of Medical Internet Research· Vol 28· 0 citations· 76 references
Medicine
TL;DR
This first scoping review of AI applications in hypertension health education identified a mismatch between rapid advances in generative AI and the limited availability of rigorous clinical evidence.
Abstract
Abstract Background Hypertension is a major global health challenge, and effective health education is crucial for improving patients’ self-management. Traditional health education approaches are often limited by insufficient personalization, accessibility, and scalability. Artificial intelligence (AI), including natural language processing, machine learning, and large language models (LLMs), offers promising solutions to address these limitations. However, evidence regarding AI applications in hypertension health education has not been comprehensively synthesized. Objective This scoping review aimed to summarize the current evidence on AI applications in hypertension health education, and identify research gaps to inform future research and practice. Methods This review followed the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. Six databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Scopus) were searched from January 2015 to June 2026. Eligibility criteria were developed using the participant-concept-context framework. Two reviewers independently conducted study screening and data extraction. Study designs were classified using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool framework. Consistent with scoping review methodology, no formal quality assessment was performed. Findings were synthesized narratively and presented using evidence gap maps, tables, and figures. Results A total of 24 studies from 11 countries were included, comprising 6 randomized controlled trials, 4 nonrandomized trials, 11 quantitative descriptive studies, and 3 mixed methods studies. Most studies were published between 2024 and 2026. In total, 3 AI application scenarios were identified: rule-based health education, data-driven adaptive health education, and generative AI–driven health education. Natural language processing was the most widely applied technology, and LLM-based applications increased rapidly after 2023. However, generative AI studies were predominantly proof-of-concept evaluations and lacked randomized clinical validation. Health education was rarely implemented as a standalone intervention and was typically embedded within multifunctional AI platforms. Outcomes were categorized using the Digital Health Scorecard Framework across 4 domains: technology, clinical, usability, and cost. Technical accuracy and blood pressure outcomes were the most frequently reported measures, whereas no study evaluated economic outcomes. Conclusions This first scoping review of AI applications in hypertension health education identified a mismatch between rapid advances in generative AI and the limited availability of rigorous clinical evidence. Three major research gaps were identified: (1) the lack of standardized core outcome sets covering technical, behavioral, clinical, and implementation domains; (2) limited development of hybrid architectures integrating LLM with structured medical knowledge bases; and (3) the absence of evaluation frameworks that satisfy both regulatory and implementation requirements. AI appears most suitable as a complement to, rather than a replacement for, clinician-delivered education. Future research should prioritize rigorous clinical validation, economic evaluation, multicultural adaptation, and health literacy equity to ensure that AI-driven health education reduces rather than exacerbates disparities in hypertension control.
Objective To map the evidence on artificial intelligence (AI)-generated diabetes-related patient education materials and patient-facing health information, with particular attention to AI models, prompting approaches, evaluation methods, and information-quality outcomes. Methods This scoping review was conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology for scoping reviews and reported following the PRISMA-ScR checklist. The review was registered on the Open Science Framework (doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/U4FAE) PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane CENTRAL, CNKI, WanFang Data, and SinoMed were searched from inception to May 1, 2026. Chinese- and English-language literature was searched. Two reviewers independently screened studies, charted data, and mapped reported outcomes to Wang and Strong's information quality framework. Outcomes not adequately represented by the framework were retained as additional dimensions. Descriptive statistics and narrative synthesis were used. Results Of 6,049 records identified, 24 studies from 11 countries or regions were included. All studies evaluated ChatGPT or another GPT-family model; 21 used zero-shot or direct prompting, three used role prompting, and two implemented retrieval-augmented generation. Eleven indicators were mapped to the information quality framework, with ease of understanding (n = 14), accuracy (n = 13), and believability (n = 9) assessed most frequently. Six additional outcomes were identified: clinical safety (n = 5), actionability (n = 3), response efficiency (n = 1), personalization (n = 1), transparency (n = 1), and empathy (n = 1). Most studies reported reading demands above those generally recommended for patient education, although findings varied by language, material type, and assessment method. Study-specific instruments were used in 17 studies (70.8%), whereas 10 (41.7%) used structured or established tools. Only six studies reported full source or model blinding, 10 reported quantitative inter-rater agreement, and three involved patients or members of the public. Conclusion Research on AI-generated diabetes education is expanding, but substantial heterogeneity in prompts, evaluators, tools, and outcome definitions limits comparison across studies. Future research should prioritize validated, multilingual, and patient-centered evaluation tools that integrate conventional information-quality attributes with clinically relevant dimensions such as safety, actionability, personalization, transparency, empathy, and response efficiency.
Jingwen Song, Norafisyah Makhdzir, Zarina Haron et al.· Frontiers in Public Health· 0 citations
A scoping review of 24 PubMed-indexed studies published between 2023 and 2026 was conducted to assess current applications, benefits, limitations, and future directions of LLMs in healthcare.
Antoni Klamka, Paulina Kawalec, Kamil Bronikowski et al.· Quality in Sport· 0 citations
Artificial intelligence has significant potential to enhance mental health nursing by supporting early identification of symptoms, improving access to care and strengthening clinical decision-making, with stronger evidence observed in reviews evaluating AI interventions for early detection and risk prediction.
J. Odame, Gabriel Obeng-Gyamfi, Dayeon Heo et al.· Journal of Psychiatric and M...· 0 citations
Unlike existing reviews prioritizing algorithmic performance metrics over usability, clinical workflow integration, and patient trust, this study systematically maps these essential sociotechnical factors and innovatively applies the HCAI framework to the sleep AI lifecycle.
Dacheng Dai, Fangfang Xie, Jiahe Cui et al.· Journal of Medical Internet...· 0 citations
AI has the potential to substantially transform hypertension management by enabling more precise, proactive, and personalized care but major barriers to implementation include data heterogeneity, algorithmic bias, limited interpretability, insufficient external validation, infrastructure and cost requirements, regulatory uncertainty, and concerns regarding patient trust and data privacy.
BACKGROUND
Obesity is a major public health challenge worldwide, driving chronic disease and health care costs. Primary health care (PHC) is a key setting for prevention, early identification, and management of obesity, yet implementation of evidence-based interventions remains limited. Identifying the barriers and enablers that influence adoption of obesity care in PHC is critical to strengthen delivery.
OBJECTIVE
This scoping review will systematically map and synthesize barriers and enablers to implementing obesity interventions in PHC, considering behavioral, nutritional, pharmacological, digital, and organizational approaches, across both adult and pediatric populations.
METHODS
The review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology and be reported according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Searches will be conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect, complemented by gray literature from OpenGrey, ResearchGate, Google Scholar, and organizational websites. Eligible sources will include peer-reviewed and gray literature published between 2019 and 2025 in English, French, German, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish, or Turkish. Two reviewers will independently screen, extract, and analyze data, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. Data will be synthesized descriptively and thematically, supported by NVivo, and results presented in tables, thematic maps, and conceptual diagrams. Expected Results Anticipated barriers include time constraints, limited provider training, stigma, scarce resources, and inadequate reimbursement models. Enablers are expected to include supportive health policies, training, patient engagement strategies, and team-based care models.
CONCLUSIONS
This review will synthesize implementation factors affecting obesity care in PHC, informing scalable strategies and policy to improve obesity management worldwide.
Sandra León-Herrera, Ileana Gefaell, M. Guisado-Clavero et al.· Obesity Reviews· 0 citations