Explainability and Human Oversight for AI-Generated Exercise Guidance in Digital Healthcare: A Governance-Oriented...

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.