# Safety-First Framework for AI-Enabled Anamnesis in Head and Neck Surgery: Evidence Synthesis from a Narrative Review

**Authors:** Luigi Angelo Vaira, Hareem Qadeer, Jerome R. Lechien, Antonino Maniaci, Fabio Maglitto, Stefania Troise, Carlos M. Chiesa-Estomba, Giuseppe Consorti, Giulio Cirignaco, Giannicola Iannella, Carlos Navarro-Cuéllar, Giovanni Salzano, Giovanni Maria Soro, Paolo Boscolo-Rizzo, Valentino Vellone, Giacomo De Riu

PMC · DOI: 10.3390/jcm15062218 · Journal of Clinical Medicine · 2026-03-14

## TL;DR

This paper reviews AI tools for medical history taking in head and neck surgery, highlighting their potential and safety concerns.

## Contribution

It provides a narrative review synthesizing evidence on AI-enabled anamnesis tools and their implications for head and neck surgery.

## Key findings

- Pre-consultation computer-assisted history taking is feasible and acceptable, reducing documentation burden.
- Symptom checkers and digital triage tools show variable performance and safety concerns.
- LLM-based dialogue systems perform well in controlled settings but need real-world validation and governance.

## Abstract

Objectives: To synthesize evidence on artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled medical history taking (anamnesis)—beyond large language models (LLMs) alone—and to translate findings into implications and research priorities for head and neck surgery. Methods: We performed a PRISMA-informed narrative review. Searches from database inception to 31 December 2025 (updated 3 January 2026) were conducted in MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Digital Library, supplemented by medRxiv/arXiv screening and citation chasing. We included studies evaluating or describing AI-supported history capture/summarization, conversational interviewing, symptom checker/digital triage, EHR-integrated intake-to-decision support pipelines, voice interviewing, education/training systems, and governance/ethical considerations related to digital anamnesis. Findings were synthesized by system category and by cross-cutting outcome domains, with a head and neck surgery interpretive lens. Results: Fifty studies (2014–2025) were included. Evidence most consistently suggested feasibility and acceptability of pre-consultation computer-assisted history taking and the potential to reduce documentation burden and improve structured capture. In contrast, symptom checkers and digital triage tools showed highly variable diagnostic/triage performance and prominent safety concerns, highlighting the importance of conservative red-flag escalation strategies, continuous monitoring, and clear accountability. LLM-based diagnostic dialogue demonstrated strong performance in controlled evaluations, but prospective real-world validation, governance, and workflow integration remain limited. Conclusions: AI-enabled anamnesis comprises heterogeneous tools with uneven evidence. For head and neck surgery, potential near-term applications may include structured pre-visit intake, clinician-facing summarization, and training applications, whereas autonomous triage warrants harm-oriented, specialty-calibrated validation and robust governance prior to broader clinical reliance.

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC13026613/full.md

## Figures

2 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC13026613/full.md

## References

56 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC13026613/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC13026613