Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantum computing (QC) represents a paradigm shift in computational power, offering unique capabilities for addressing complex problems that are infeasible for classical computers. This review paper provides a detailed account of the current state of QC, with a particular focus on its applications within medicine. It explores fundamental concepts such as qubits, superposition, and entanglement, as well as the evolution of QC from theoretical foundations to practical advancements. The paper covers significant milestones where QC has intersected with medical research, including breakthroughs in drug discovery, molecular modeling, genomics, and medical diagnostics. Additionally, key quantum techniques such as quantum algorithms, quantum machine learning (QML), and quantum-enhanced imaging are explained, highlighting their relevance in healthcare. The paper also addresses challenges in the field, including hardware limitations, scalability, and integration within clinical environments. Looking forward, the paper discusses the potential for quantum-classical hybrid systems and emerging innovations in quantum hardware, suggesting how these advancements may accelerate the adoption of QC in medical research and clinical practice. By synthesizing reliable knowledge and presenting it through a comprehensive lens, this paper serves as a valuable reference for researchers interested in the transformative potential of QC in medicine.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".