From Chronology to Physiology: A Critical Translational Assessment of Artificial Intelligence for Precision Healthspan Measurement

2026

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.3390/ijtm6040045
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Healthspan, the period of life free from major chronic disease and disability, is a central geroscience outcome, yet its prediction remains difficult due to its multidimensional and heterogeneous nature. In this review, we synthesize advances in artificial intelligence (AI) for precision healthspan assessment, shifting from chronological age estimates toward physiologically grounded, individualized health trajectory forecasting. We examine supervised, deep, self-supervised, and reinforcement learning approaches, alongside AI-based biomarkers of aging, including epigenetic, proteomic, imaging, and wearable-derived digital biomarkers. We also discuss multimodal AI integrating multi-omic, imaging, and sensor data, explainable AI for clinical translation, and key issues in validation, regulation, ethics, bias, privacy, and equitable access. We critically appraise the level of validation supporting each major technology, distinguish biological-age estimation from true healthspan prediction, and separate predictive performance from demonstrated clinical utility. In this review, we conclude that AI-powered healthspan algorithms hold promise for shifting healthcare from reactive disease management to proactive, personalized aging management, but current evidence remains strongest for prediction and weakest for clinical utility; translation will require rigorous external and prospective validation, standardized outcomes, robust ethical and regulatory frameworks, and equitable implementation.