Digital twins in healthcare: a review of AI-powered practical applications across health domains
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This review examines the evolving role of digital twins (DTs) in healthcare and how artificial intelligence (AI) is shaping personalized medicine across various medical fields. Digital twins are virtual models that mirror individual patient profiles, making it possible to customize treatments and predict health outcomes more accurately. Through a refined selection process, we have identified 17 distinct applications of this technology in the past four years, each offering significant contributions to AI-driven healthcare innovation. This review highlights the progress of AI-powered digital twins in areas such as heart health, diabetic care, mental wellness, respiratory health, and stress management. To support reader understanding and accessibility, we present intuitive visuals that break down complex processes, aiming to give a clear view of AI’s expanding potential to reshape healthcare toward more proactive and patient-specific outcomes.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it