Search

Synthetic electronic health record (EHR) data generation has emerged as a potential solution to balancing clinical data accessibility with patient privacy, using generative artificial intelligence to simulate tabular, longitudinal, and textual health records without exposing identifiable patient information. This critical review, informed by PRISMA-ScR methodology, examines studies published between 2017 and 2025 focusing on generative models for synthetic EHR creation, with particular attention to privacy risks, data fidelity, downstream task utility, and ethical or regulatory considerations. A total of 67 studies were included after systematic screening, showing a dominance of GAN-based approaches alongside growing use of diffusion models and large language models in recent years, although privacy assessment and benchmarking practices remain inconsistent. Overall, the evidence suggests that while synthetic EHR data can facilitate data sharing, research, and model development, achieving a balance between realism, utility, and privacy remains challenging, as high statistical fidelity does not necessarily translate into clinical usefulness and strong downstream performance does not ensure adequate privacy protection.

Generative artificial intelligence (AI), including GANs, VAEs, and diffusion models, is increasingly used for synthesizing and enhancing medical images, helping address challenges such as limited data, expensive acquisition, and rare disease representation. This systematic review examines studies on generative AI methods for MRI, CT, X-ray, and pathology image synthesis from 2017 to 2026, focusing on synthesis tasks, evaluation strategies, and clinical utility. A PRISMA 2020-compliant search of PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, and Web of Science identified peer-reviewed research on generative models for medical image synthesis, augmentation, harmonization, or cross-modality translation. Findings show a shift from GAN-based methods to diffusion models post-2022, with MRI and CT studies emphasizing cross-modality translation, and X-ray and pathology studies focusing on augmentation and diagnostic utility. Despite GANs' continued dominance, diffusion models are gaining traction for improving image fidelity and diversity. However, evaluation practices remain inconsistent, with limited inclusion of clinically relevant assessments. This review follows PRISMA 2020 guidelines and provides a narrative synthesis of the evidence.

Hospital boards and quality committees depend on monthly clinical governance dashboards to oversee safety, quality, compliance, and organizational risk. Yet producing these reports often requires repeated manual consolidation of metrics, audit findings, incident summaries, and executive commentary from fragmented operational systems. Manual dashboard assembly can delay insight, increase administrative burden, and introduce errors when data are copied across spreadsheets, documents, and presentation templates. These workflows also make it difficult to maintain consistent language, trace every claim to its source, and produce timely board-ready narratives. This article proposes a generative AI framework that ingests quality metrics, audit reports, incident logs, compliance indicators, and executive reporting templates to produce a complete draft clinical governance dashboard. The framework is conceptual and intended to support first-draft preparation rather than autonomous publication. The proposed architecture includes a multi-source data ingestion layer, a template-guided large language model, a factual verification module, and a collaborative human-review interface. Together, these components could transform scattered institutional data into structured narrative sections, exception summaries, and draft governance commentary. The framework could reduce report preparation time, improve formatting consistency, and allow quality specialists to focus on interpretation, escalation, and improvement planning rather than repetitive assembly. Its value would depend on source grounding, auditability, privacy protection, and a clear approval workflow. Automated draft governance reporting is an audacious but feasible application of generative AI in complex health systems. With careful design, human oversight, and rigorous evaluation, such systems could support higher-integrity reporting without replacing clinical accountability.

Healthcare administration is document-intensive, communication-heavy, and increasingly dependent on digital systems that require timely synthesis of clinical and operational information. Generative artificial intelligence has been proposed as a potential means of reducing administrative workload across documentation, reporting, patient communication, governance, and workflow coordination. This systematic review examined applications of generative artificial intelligence across five healthcare administrative domains: documentation support, operational reporting, patient communication, governance dashboards, and workflow automation. The review aimed to characterize reported use cases, model types, evaluation approaches, implementation barriers, and evidence maturity from 2017 to 2025. A PRISMA 2020-compliant search strategy was applied to PubMed, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, and Web of Science for studies published between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2025. Screening was conducted in duplicate, and eligible studies were synthesized narratively by administrative domain. Documentation support was the most mature domain, particularly for clinical summarization, discharge summaries, patient-message drafting, and document classification. Operational reporting and governance dashboards were emerging areas, while patient communication and workflow automation showed diverse prototypes but limited prospective validation. Common challenges included hallucination, privacy, bias, regulatory uncertainty, integration burden, and limited evidence of real-world administrative impact. Generative artificial intelligence appears technically capable of supporting multiple healthcare administrative tasks, but evidence remains uneven across domains. Real-world impact, safety, scalability, and governance require stronger evaluation before these systems can be relied upon for high-stakes administrative decision-making.