The AMA argues that physicians shouldn’t be expected to stand between clinical AI and patient harm when many aspects of AI development and deployment are outside their control.

Clinical AI tools are being widely adopted to support clinical decision-making and reduce administrative burdens that often result in clinician burnout. However, concerns about who is liable when AI tools make mistakes are top of mind for physicians. An AMA survey released earlier this year shows that a third of physicians cited “clear liability frameworks" as the primary driver of AI adoption.

This survey finding, along with the potential for patient harm if responsibility for AI is not clearly defined, led the AMA to create its latest framework, according to Goldsack.

“This [framework] is going to create the rubric by which every different stakeholder gets very clear on their responsibility to proactively implement best practices where they have the ability to mitigate risk,” she said.

Per the framework, physicians must exercise their clinical judgment when using AI, including interrogating AI outputs and, when necessary, dismissing AI recommendations. However, the AMA underscored that physicians cannot be held responsible for AI errors that they cannot control.

For instance, if a physician created a treatment plan based on the recommendation of an AI-driven clinical decision support tool, but the tool fails to take into account critical data to make that recommendation and the physician does not have visibility into this error, they should not be held responsible for the patient harm that may occur, Goldsack said.

Source link