Your review provides a useful contribution by identifying five key clusters in AI-enabled product-service innovation (PSI) literature. However, I noticed that most of your bibliographic coupling and content analysis seem to rely heavily on published literature and secondary analysis of conceptual frameworks.
Given that AI-enabled PSI is highly dynamic and context-specific (varying greatly by sector, firm size, and ecosystem maturity), have you considered the possible limitations of not including primary empirical insights (e.g., from expert interviews, industry white papers, or practitioner reports)?
Do you think this reliance on academic articles alone might overlook emerging practical challenges or novel applications that haven’t yet made it into the peer-reviewed literature?
I’d appreciate your thoughts on whether triangulating these insights could strengthen the validity of your proposed future research directions.