Research questions arise in the course of care. A professor with deep experience in the work knows when to suspect a particular finding, which records to read together, and when judgment should be withheld. That knowledge is often at work in the clinic before it appears in a paper or guideline.
This is not a request to evaluate a finished product. The professor and research team lead the work: they set the question and interpret the findings. AetherHeal turns the question into a tool that can be tested and takes responsibility for the software, data processing, and research environment.
We are currently inviting professors to explore research in this form. We do not claim an active collaboration, IRB approval, data access, established clinical evidence, or regulatory status. A conversation with or participation by an individual researcher does not represent an agreement, endorsement, or recommendation by that person's institution. We name an institution only after an agreement is in place and the permitted scope of disclosure has been confirmed.
Why now
Clinical knowledge is no less valuable. What has changed is the cost structure of turning that knowledge into software that can be tested.
Until recently, turning a clinical question into software meant documenting requirements, finding a separate development team, establishing repositories and access controls, designing data schemas and annotation interfaces, fixing an execution environment, and managing errors and changes after deployment. Recruitment, outsourcing contracts, server procurement, security review, and maintenance could all precede the first test of the research question.
Generative AI and reusable development tools have reduced the work required to build a small research tool. An interface, data processing, annotation rules, and an evaluation environment can be held within one defined scope. The version used in a study can also be fixed and rerun under the same conditions. The investigator sets the clinical criteria and exceptions, decides what counts as input and when judgment should be withheld, and determines which results are meaningful.
AetherHeal is responsible for development and operation of the research environment. With the professor, we document the hypothesis, protocol, and rules governing how the tool behaves. We configure the environment within the approved study scope.
What we build together
We do not begin with AetherHeal's product catalogue. We begin with the research question, then define the inputs, unit of judgment, abstention criteria, and how the results will be interpreted before building the tool the question requires.
- Review support for a defined procedure
- Within investigator-defined inputs and findings, a tool could organize images, indicate locations and supporting evidence for review, and record the conditions under which interpretation should be withheld.
- Follow-up measures for a defined cohort
- From an approved cohort dataset, a tool could collect the measures specified in the protocol and identify missing fields and the next follow-up point.
- A handoff structure for one specialty
- A tool could structure the problems, evidence, incomplete work, and ownership that must carry through a handoff according to that specialty's workflow.
Research AI does not necessarily require a new model trained from scratch. Depending on the question, we select only the components needed: search and classification, annotation assistance, a workflow combining rules and models, or separate training. The choice follows the research question, the data, and reproducibility—not whichever feature is in fashion.
Bespoke development can be included in the research-support scope. That scope is limited to the question, approved data, users, functions, evaluation measures, fixed version, and exit conditions recorded in the protocol and agreement. It may include the interfaces, pipelines, annotation, analytical support, and deployment required for the research tool. Integration with a hospital's systems of record (booking, EMR, or CRM), hospital-wide release, service levels for clinical operations, and continuous maintenance are not treated as part of the same scope. Moving a research result into clinical operations requires separate security, regulatory, transition, and contractual review.
Who contributes what
The research team sets the clinical question and makes the research judgments. AetherHeal provides the engineering needed to turn those judgments into an executable tool. Neither party exercises the other's authority.
How the data-governance terms are set
Before work begins, the parties define control of source data, who may access it, responsibility for de-identification, who leads institutional review, and what happens when the study ends. The terms below are our default proposal; final terms follow institutional policy, review decisions, and the research collaboration agreement.
Who owns the results, and how is authorship determined?
Technical support does not alter academic leadership of the research or the principle that findings may be disclosed. The collaboration agreement sets the allocation of specific rights and review periods before the study begins.
Academic leadership
The professor and research team retain academic leadership of the research question, study design, clinical interpretation, and manuscript. We propose terms under which neither the findings nor the manuscript becomes the exclusive asset of one party. Participating researchers have the right to analyze and present the findings within the agreed research purpose.
Data and intellectual property
The research institution controls the source data, and each participant retains the intellectual property it held before the study. The research collaboration agreement separately defines rights to use the research tool and source code, inventions arising during the study, generalizable foundation modules, and any reuse of pseudonymized derivative data, according to contribution and institutional policy.
Publication of negative findings
We propose terms that do not prevent presentation or submission when findings are negative or not statistically conclusive. AetherHeal will not request changes to a manuscript, delay disclosure, or seek withdrawal from publication because of the direction of the findings.
Authorship criteria
Authorship and author order follow the target journal's criteria and actual scholarly contribution. Roles are documented before the study begins and updated to reflect actual contribution before manuscript submission. Providing a tool, funding, or technical support alone does not establish authorship.
Review before submission
Each institution may review a manuscript before submission for factual accuracy, personal information, confidential information, and patentability. That review does not confer authority to change the interpretation of findings or refuse disclosure. The agreement sets the review period and any limited delay required for a patent filing in advance.
Where to begin
We are currently inviting professors and research teams to explore AI research with us. This does not mean that a study is under way with any institution, or that IRB approval, data access, clinical evidence, or regulatory review has been secured or completed.
- 01
A one-page research question
Set out the clinical question, the workflow currently performed by hand, the types of data that may be available and their access status, and the output the tool would need to produce.
- 02
Scope and feasibility review
Review whether the question can be implemented as a research tool, whether the required data and evaluation conditions can be established, and whether the scope is distinct from hospital-wide operational adoption.
- 03
Protocol and agreement
Document the roles, measures, data responsibilities, bespoke-development scope, costs, rights in the results, authorship criteria, and conditions for ending the study.
- 04
Institutional review and environment preparation
Access to data and setup of the research environment begin only after the required IRB and data reviews, contracts, and security review are complete.
- Prepared by
- AetherHeal
- Document status
- Research collaboration proposal
Send us a one-page research question, and we will review with you whether it can become an approvable study scope and an implementable research tool. Send enquiries to drjeeju@aetherheal.com.