De la pregunta clínica a la evidencia científica: un recorrido por las herramientas basadas en inteligencia artificial para apoyar la toma de decisiones clínicas
From clinical question to scientific evidence: an overview of artificial intelligence-based tools to support clinical decision-making
Keywords:
Inteligencia Artificial, Pediatría, Sistemas de Soporte de Decisión Clínica, Síntesis de Evidencia, Artificial Intelligence , Pediatrics, Clinical Decision Support Systems, Evidence SynthesisAbstract
Sección a cargo de Julián Battolla, María del Pilar Arias López y Gustavo Frei
La irrupción de la inteligencia artificial (IA) está transformando la búsqueda de información médica, aunque su implementación en nuestro ámbito presenta desafíos y paradojas singulares. En la práctica actual conviven los modelos de lenguaje de propósito general, utilizados informalmente por su gran accesibilidad, con los sistemas de decisión clínica especializados basados en recuperación de literatura, cuyo uso formal aún es minoritario en nuestra región. Mientras los primeros destacan por su fluidez comunicativa pero acarrean riesgos estructurales de alucinaciones y citas inexactas, las herramientas especializadas ofrecen mayor trazabilidad bibliográfica, aunque suelen carecer de guías pediátricas y contextos adaptados a la realidad latinoamericana. Para el médico pediatra, esto implica que ninguna plataforma constituye un sustituto del razonamiento médico. Frente a un escenario regulatorio cada vez más exigente y a la escasez de validaciones locales robustas, el verdadero reto no radica en elegir una aplicación específica, sino en desarrollar una sólida alfabetización en IA. Esto resulta indispensable para evaluar críticamente cada respuesta, verificar rigurosamente las fuentes y preservar el juicio clínico como eje fundamental en el cuidado de nuestros pacientes.
References
Bold B, Serin O, Tantri Adhiatma L, et al. Global physician perspectives on artificial intelligencein healthcare across 50 countries and territories. npj Digit Med. 2026
Lünse S, Wisotzky EL, Renz-Kiefel L, et al. Artificial intelligence and chatbots in general sur-gery: a survey among surgeons in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Surg Endosc. 2026 Jul1.doi:10.1007/s00464-026-13044-5.
Solmonovich RL, Kouba I, Lee JY, et al. Physician awareness of, interest in, and current use ofartificial intelligence large language model-based virtual assistants. PLoS One. 2025;20(5):e0320749. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0320749.
Portilho L, Marin HF. Artificial Intelligence: The Use and Application by Brazilian HealthcareProfessionals. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2026; 336:705-709. doi:10.3233/SHTI260262.
Nguyen TD, Whaley CM, Simon K, et al. Adoption of Artificial Intelligence in the Health CareSector. JAMA Health Forum. 2025; 6(11):e255029. doi:10.1001/jamahealthforum.2025.5029.
Adib K, Dunning HE, Letchford N, et al. Artificial intelligence in health systems of the WHO Eu-ropean region: implementation, applications, opportunities, and barriers. Int J Med Inform.2026; 218:106532. doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2026.106532.
Bagla P, Hanna J, Marthambadi B, et al. Patterns of AI Use in Clinical Work by Hospitalists:Survey Study. J Med Internet Res. 2026; 28:e85973. doi:10.2196/85973.
Laymouna M, Ma Y, Lessard D, et al. Roles, Users, Benefits, and Limitations of Chatbots inHealth Care: Rapid Review. J Med Internet Res. 2024; 26:e56930. doi:10.2196/56930.
Low YS, Jackson ML, Hyde RJ, et al. Answering real-world clinical questions using large lan-guage model, retrieval-augmented generation, and agentic systems. Digit health. 2025;11:20552076251348850. doi:10.1177/20552076251348850.
Hurt RT, Stephenson CR, Gilman EA, et al. The Use of an Artificial Intelligence Platform Open-Evidence to Augment Clinical Decision-Making for Primary Care Physicians. J Prim Care Com-munity Health. 2025;16:21501319251332215.doi:10.1177/21501319251332215.
Philip S, Kurian R. OpenEvidence. J Med Libr Assoc. 2026;114(1):86-87.doi:10.5195/jmla.2026.2247.
Carpenter Wellington PLLC. OpenEvidence closes $250 million Series D funding round at $12billion valuation. Lexology ⦍Internet⦎ 18 de febrero de 2026. [citado 24 Ago 2026]. Disponibleen: lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e51cc1c8-f651-4ede-9659-d968cb54a7ab.
Wolters Kluwer. Wolters Kluwer's new UpToDate Expert AI provides clinicians and health sys-tems with the fast, reliable GenAI clinical decision support they need [comunicado de prensaen Internet]. 24 sept 2025. [citado el 24 de agosto de 2026]. Disponible en:https://www.wolterskluwer.com/en/news/uptodate-expert-ai-genai-clinical-decision-support
EBSCO. DynaMed vs. UpToDate: AI Clinical Decision Support Tools Comparison. Health-Notesblog [Internet]. 22 Dic 2025 [citado 24 ago 2026]. Disponible en:https://about.ebsco.com/blogs/health-notes/dynamed-vs-uptodate-ai-clinical-decision-support-tools-comparison
Elsevier. Elsevier Health launches ClinicalKey AI, an advanced clinical decision support tool forclinicians [comunicado de prensa en Internet]. 2024 feb 29 [24 agosto 2026]. Disponibleen:https://www.elsevier.com/about/press-releases/elsevier-health-launches-clinicalkey-ai-the-most-advanced-gen-ai-powered
Glass Health. Clinical AI Resources for Clinicians [Internet]. 2026 [citado 24 ago 2026]. Dis-ponible en: https://glass.health/resources
Amazon Web Services. ¿Qué es RAG (generación aumentada por recuperación)? [Internet].2026 [citado 24 ago 2026]. Disponible en: https://aws.amazon.com/what-is/retrieval-augmented-generation/
Ayers JW, Poliak A, Dredze M, et al. Comparing Physician and Artificial Intelligence ChatbotResponses to Patient Questions Posted to a Public Social Media Forum. JAMA Intern Med.2023;183(6):589-596. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2023.1838.
Mauffrey O, Lashani S, Heyer JH, et al. The ABCs of PEMs: Using Artificial Intelligence to En-hance the Readability of Patient Educational Materials in Pediatric Orthopaedics. J Pediatr Or-thop Soc N Am. 2025; 13:100273. doi:10.1016/j.jposna.2025.100273.
Walters C, Young P. Artificial Intelligence in Orthopedic Trauma: A Narrative Review. Cureus.2026; 18(4):e107574. doi:10.7759/cureus.107574.
Huang KA, Samvelian D, Xu AL, et al. Comparative Performance of Seven Mainstream LargeLanguage Models on the 2022 American College of Radiology Diagnostic Imaging In-TrainingExamination. Cureus. 2026; 18(4):e106486. doi:10.7759/cureus.106486.
Goodman RS, Patrinely JR, Stone CA Jr, et al. Accuracy and Reliability of Chatbot Responsesto Physician Questions. JAMA Netw Open. 2023; 6(10):e2336483.doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.36483.
Vishwanath K, Alyakin A, Ghosh M, et al. General-purpose large language models outperformspecialized clinical AI tools on medical benchmarks. Nat Med. 2026;32(7):2405-2409.doi:10.1038/s41591-026-04431-5.
Feng J, Patel V, Heagerty P, et al. Expert Evaluation of Clinical AI Tools on Real Point-of-CareClinical Queries. arXiv:2606.28960v1 [cs.AI]. 2026 Jun 27. [citado 24 ago 2026]. doi:https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.28960
Giles B. ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude outperform clinical AI tools: Study. Becker's Hospital Re-view. [Internet]16 Junio 2026. [citado 24 ago 2026]. Disponible en: beckershospitalre-view.com/healthcare-information-technology/ai/chatgpt-gemini-claude-beat-clinical-ai-tools-study/
James V, Caronia C, Savargaonkar R. Input structure–driven instability and convergence inlarge language model clinical reasoning: a formative study using pediatric residency–levelMCQs. Sci Rep. 2026;16(1):17829. doi:10.1038/s41598-026-48326-4.
Exmann CJC, Hiltunen AM, Haavisto I, et al. Uptake of Clinical Decision Support SystemsAmong Health Care Professionals in Six European Countries and the United States: Cross-Sectional Survey Within the I-CARE4OLD Project. J Med Internet Res. 2026; 28:e85071.doi:10.2196/85071.
Abdelwahed AE, Abd El-Nasser M, Heih OQ, et al. Public attitudes and practices toward usingAI chatbots for healthcare assistance: a multinational cross-sectional study. BMC Health ServRes. 2026; 26:335. doi:10.1186/s12913-025-13832-0
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Recommendations for the Con-duct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. Updated Janu-ary 2026, Section V (Artificial Intelligence). Disponible en: icmje.org/recommendations/.
ECRI. Top 10 Health Technology Hazards for 2026: Executive Brief. [Internet] 21 de enero de2026. [citado 24 ago 2026]. Disponible en: https://home.ecri.org/blogs/ecri-thought-leadership-resources/top-10-health-technology-hazards-for-2026-executive-brief
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Revista del Hospital de Niños de Buenos Aires

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Todo el contenido que se publica en la Revista del Hospital de Niños de Buenos Aires está bajo una Licencia Creative Commons Atribución – No Comercial – Sin Obra Derivada 4.0 Internacional (CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0)