Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Health systems and care delivery

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Artificial intelligence (AI) has stimulated extensive research in clinical neurology, but relatively few AI systems have meaningfully changed bedside decision-making. This translational gap is not explained solely by inadequate algorithms. More often, AI models in neurology remain outside routine practice because they are trained on unstable labels, validated in narrow or single-center datasets, evaluated primarily by discrimination metrics, disconnected from clinical workflow, and deployed without prospective monitoring, reimbursement frameworks, or accountability. In this review, we propose the NEURAL framework for practice-changing neurological AI: Novel clinical insight, External and prospective validation, Utility over accuracy, Real-time workflow integration, Algorithmic transparency, and Long-term outcome linkage. Using this framework, we examine evidence across acute stroke, epilepsy and electroencephalography (EEG), sleep medicine, neurodegenerative disease, movement disorders, headache, vestibular disorders, neuroimmunology, rehabilitation, and neurocritical care. The most clinically advanced examples come from acute stroke, where imaging-based selection, large-vessel occlusion detection, and automated notification are linked to urgent, pathway-defined interventions. Automated EEG triage, focal cortical dysplasia detection, selected sleep-analysis tools, quantitative biomarker pipelines, and AI-assisted longitudinal monitoring may also become clinically meaningful if tested prospectively in real-world workflows. Many high-performing models for dementia progression, prodromal Parkinson disease, outpatient treatment response, and long-horizon risk prediction remain pre-implementation tools because they do not yet define a validated clinical action. Future neurological AI should therefore be judged less by whether it recognizes complex patterns and more by whether it improves the right decision for the right patient at the right time. A clinically useful AI system must demonstrate not only accuracy, but also actionability, workflow fit, equity, safety, sustainability, and measurable benefit for patients and health systems.

Key findings

Why it matters

This review proposes the NEURAL framework for artificial intelligence in neurology and notes that most clinically advanced AI examples come from acute stroke, while many high-performing dementia models have not been tested prospectively in real-world workflows. It concerns translating algorithms into practice and does not report any treatment, cure or prevention of Alzheimer's disease.

Study details

How this study scored 40/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 1 of 4; Study design 7 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 5 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 0 of 7; Citations per year 0 of 5; Impact for its field and year 0 of 6; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited 0 of 4; Senior author's track record 2 of 4; Institution's track record 1 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 2 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. Total 40 of 100.40 of 100 points earned60 not earned

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of clinical neurology (Seoul, Korea))
Journal's citation record 1 / 4 Journal of Clinical Neurology: journal h-index 75 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 7 / 12 A longitudinal study following the same people over time
Strength of evidence 3 / 5 Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 5 / 5 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 0 / 3 Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 0 / 7 Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-17)
Citations per year 0 / 5 0.0 citations a year over 2 year(s) since 2026
Impact for its field and year 0 / 6 Cited 0.0× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 0 / 6 No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited 0 / 4 Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 2 / 4 Last-listed author Byung‐Jo Kim: h-index 44 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 1 / 3 Shanghai Jiao Tong University: institution h-index 973 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 2 / 3 OpenAlex lists 6 institution(s) in 2 countries
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 42421400)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total 40 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Yongcheon, K., Seung-Ah, C., Seogsong, J., Ding, J., Xinshi, W., Hwamin, L., et al. (2026). Artificial Intelligence That Changes Clinical Neurology Practice: Translating Algorithms Into Actionable Care. Journal of clinical neurology (Seoul, Korea). https://doi.org/10.3988/jcn.2026.0312

Vancouver

Yongcheon K, Seung-Ah C, Seogsong J, Ding J, Xinshi W, Hwamin L, et al. Artificial Intelligence That Changes Clinical Neurology Practice: Translating Algorithms Into Actionable Care. Journal of clinical neurology (Seoul, Korea). 2026. doi:10.3988/jcn.2026.0312. PMID: 42421400.

BibTeX

@article{yongcheon2026-42421400,
  author  = {Yongcheon, Kim and Seung-Ah, Choe and Seogsong, Jeong and Ding, Jie and Xinshi, Wang and Hwamin, Lee and Byung-Jo, Kim},
  title   = {{Artificial Intelligence That Changes Clinical Neurology Practice: Translating Algorithms Into Actionable Care}},
  journal = {Journal of clinical neurology (Seoul, Korea)},
  year    = {2026},
  doi     = {10.3988/jcn.2026.0312},
  pmid    = {42421400},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3988/jcn.2026.0312}
}

Related studies in Health systems and care delivery

Also tagged “classification”

835 studies in the library carry the topic tag “classification”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 835 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Health systems and care delivery

See all studies in Health systems and care delivery →