AI is speeding into healthcare. Who should regulate it? - Harvard Gazette

"Whenever medical AI handles anything with medium to high risk, you want regulation: internal self-regulation or external governmental regulation. It's mostly been internal thus far, and there are differences in how each hospital system validates, reviews, and monitors healthcare AI. When done on a hospital-by-hospital basis like this, costs to do this kind of evaluation and monitoring can be significant, which means some hospitals can do this, and some can't."

"AI is moving quickly into healthcare, bringing potential benefits but also possible pitfalls such as bias that drives unequal care and burnout of physicians and other healthcare workers. It remains undecided how it should be regulated in the U.S. In September, the hospital-accrediting Joint Commission and the Coalition for Health AI issued recommendations for implementing artificial intelligence in medical care, with the burden for compliance falling largely on individual facilities."

AI is moving quickly into healthcare, bringing benefits and pitfalls such as bias that can produce unequal care and clinician burnout. Hospital-accrediting bodies issued recommendations that place compliance burdens largely on individual facilities. When medical AI poses medium-to-high risk, either internal self-regulation or external governmental regulation is required. Current oversight is mostly internal and varies across hospital systems in validation, review, and monitoring practices. Hospital-by-hospital evaluation and monitoring can be costly, creating disparities in capacity, while top-down regulation can be slow. Changes are needed to reduce regulatory and financial burdens, particularly for small hospital systems, while maintaining thoughtful limits to protect patients.

Read at Harvard Gazette