SAIMSARA Journal

Machine Generated Science • ISSN 3054-3991

AI Medical Device Safety: Scoping Review with ☸️SAIMSARA.

Digital Health icon

Digital Health

Issue 3, Volume 1, 2026

DOI: 10.62487/saimsaraa33bf709

Editorial note
• Last update: 2026-05-18 13:01:10
What is this paper about
AI medical device safety is no longer just about model accuracy — this evidence map shows why real risk emerges across the full lifecycle: retraining, workflow integration, postmarket surveillance, cybersecurity, and human oversight. Built from 146 references and 151 original studies, the full map gives a practical view of where AI medical devices are already improving safety, where reporting and regulation still fail, and which safeguards matter before deployment.
Human-verified editorial review Verified by World ID proof-of-human. This editorial layer was submitted from a SAIMSARA account verified as a unique human.


Abstract: To synthesize the available structured evidence on AI medical device safety, with emphasis on lifecycle risk management, postmarket surveillance, clinical deployment, cybersecurity, usability, workflow integration, and regulatory oversight. The review uses 146 references and builds its evidence map from 151 original studies with 1823692 total participants/sample observations (topic-deduplicated ΣN). Across the mapped evidence, AI medical device safety emerges predominantly as a lifecycle governance challenge rather than a one-time performance question, with risks shifting after deployment through model updates, workflow integration, and connected infrastructure. Recurrent signals indicate that postmarket reporting is often insufficient to attribute harms to AI components, with 34.5% of FDA medical device reports lacking adequate AI/ML information and less than 2% of approved AI devices updated through retraining despite documented site-specific performance shifts. Promising mitigations span deployment safety cases, usability engineering, threshold customization, and IoMT cybersecurity monitoring, but their clinical impact remains supported mainly by experimental and early-phase evidence. This suggests a practical role for adaptive, auditable oversight frameworks that link premarket clearance to continuous real-world monitoring. Future research should prioritize prospective deployment studies with standardized AI-specific safety reporting to close the gap between technical promise and demonstrated patient benefit.

Keywords: AI medical devices; Medical device safety; Post-market surveillance; Adverse event reporting; Regulatory compliance; Software as medical device; Model retraining; Distribution shift; Predictive maintenance; Clinical workflow safety

Review Stats

Get access to the full paper

Unlock the full evidence map

The full evidence review, including the Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, figures, and complete reference index, opens after purchase or sign-in. The Evidence Object JSON is a separate machine-readable evidence product: a concentrated synthesis of results, topic-level evidence, and discussion across original and non-original studies. It can be directly input into your LLM, agent, or RAG workflow.

Reference Index (146)