Actionable companion · Governance and equitable decisions

From leadership research to district action: Explainability and Human Oversight for AI-Generated Exercise Guidance in Digital Healthcare: A Governance-Oriented Narrative Review

AI-assisted editorial implementation guide. Proposed district actions are separate from the original authors’ findings and recommendations. Independent peer review of this guide is not asserted.

Evidence and transfer

Education-related source: verify which participants, institutions and outcomes were actually studied before district adoption. Source publication type: review-article. License and identity checks do not establish study quality or causality.

Original authors’ abstract, reproduced under the source license:

Abstract Background: Large language models and other generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools are increasingly being embedded in digital healthcare services, including mobile health applications, telerehabilitation, remote monitoring, and hybrid care pathways. In this review, digital healthcare refers to technology-mediated healthcare services in which digital platforms, mobile applications, wearables, remote communication, and AI-enabled interfaces support health assessment, self-management, rehabilitation, clinical decision support, or service delivery. When AI-generated exercise guidance moves from general education to individualized recommendations about dose, progression, contraindications, or rehabilitation, it may become directly actionable and safety-relevant. Objectives: This review aimed to clarify when AI-generated exercise guidance in digital healthcare may warrant safety-relevant governance attention and to outline implementation considerations for explainability, human oversight, and service-level governance. It addresses a gap in the literature: general AI-governance and exercise-prescription discussions rarely specify how point-of-use explanations, review thresholds, and escalation safeguards can be organized for directly actionable AI exercise guidance. Methods: We conducted a governance-oriented narrative review of peer-reviewed literature and representative regulatory or guidance documents. This review was not designed as a systematic review, scoping review, or exhaustive evidence map; transparent source mapping was used to support conceptual synthesis. Searches and source mapping focused on generative AI, large language models, explainable AI, clinical decision support, digital health, mobile health, exercise prescription, rehabilitation, trust, automation bias, and human oversight. Sources were included when they informed the safety, explainability, governance, or real-world implementation of patient-facing AI-generated exercise guidance. Extracted material was grouped by evidentiary role and synthesized through framework synthesis and governance mapping to distinguish literature-supported observations, author interpretation, and proposed implementation tools. Results: The included sources were first organized into five thematic groups: digital exercise delivery and exercise-prescription evidence; explainability, trust, and automation bias literature; professional responsibility, ethics, and patient disclosure literature; regulatory and policy documents; and digital literacy, patient/clinician attitudes, and equity literature. The synthesis then proceeded from safety relevance to explanation needs, human oversight and escalation needs, and selected regulatory and policy signals before translating these strands into conceptual and implementation-oriented outputs rather than empirically validated instruments. AI-generated exercise guidance was most safety-relevant in scenarios involving individualized dose, progression, contraindication-sensitive action, or rehabilitation strategy. Across the included sources, generic transparency alone was not sufficient to support reviewable use; relevant explanation elements included evidence sources, risk warnings, reasoning paths, and reasonable alternatives. Oversight considerations varied with embodied risk, clinical ambiguity, user vulnerability, and likelihood of direct enactment. Implementation considerations linked interface design, clinical review, escalation, auditability, and post-deployment monitoring. Conclusions: AI-generated exercise guidance in digital healthcare may warrant governance attention as a patient-safety and accountability issue when it influences actionable exercise decisions. The proposed framework offers a conceptual basis for designing more reviewable and accountable mobile and remote exercise-support services. Future work can validate these outputs in patient-facing services, clinician review workflows, usability studies, implementation pilots, and safety evaluations. Keywords: artificial intelligence, generative AI, digital healthcare, exercise prescription, explainable artificial intelligence, patient safety, human oversight, telerehabilitation

A 90-day district inquiry

1. Days 1–15 · Appraise. Read the source methods, recruitment, comparator, outcomes and limitations. Record how the study setting differs from your district and which claim the design can support.
2. Days 16–30 · Design. Select one recurring district decision. Publish the decision owner, evidence requirements, consultation process and appeal route; test the process on a bounded low-risk decision. Agree participation, privacy protections, baseline and stopping rules before starting.
3. Days 31–60 · Observe. Collect the pre-agreed measures, keep a log of implementation changes and invite confidential voluntary feedback. Preserve existing support for staff and learners.
4. Days 61–90 · Decide. Track decision time, unresolved objections, documented reasons, appeals and access differences. Review whether the process changes who can participate and who carries the burden. Make a dated decision to stop, revise or extend the inquiry.

Board decision brief

Present the local problem, source setting, evidence limits, intervention, responsible owner, total cost, measured changes and uncertainty. Separate staff perceptions, implementation measures and student learning outcomes.

Attribution and reuse

Kaijiang Pan; Caihua Huang; Xinyu Lin; Shengqi Huang. Explainability and Human Oversight for AI-Generated Exercise Guidance in Digital Healthcare: A Governance-Oriented Narrative Review. Healthcare (2026-06-15). https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare14121716

Prepared 2026-11-07. Source authorship and DOI are preserved. The abstract and source passages are attributed extracts; this editorial guide is offered under the same CC BY 4.0 license.