AI in healthcare: Regulatory guidelines and judge-made negligence principles for AI implementers

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare may, notwithstanding its potential benefits, result in harm to patients from allegedly negligent acts or omissions by hospitals and medical doctors. In such circumstances, how should the principles in the tort of negligence (duty of care, breach, causation, remoteness of damage, and defences) respond to AI innovations in healthcare? In particular, how may the standard of care expected of hospitals and medical doctors be informed by regulatory guidelines? We refer to case law precedents and regulatory guidelines on the roles and responsibilities of doctors and hospitals as AI implementers. Importantly, they prompt further reflection and consideration as to how regulatory guidelines can impact the application of judge-made principles in negligence in connection with, for example, the reliance on medical AI in clinical practice, the disclosure of AI usage and risks to patients and the challenges posed by the opacity and non-explainability of medical AI.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medical Law International
Published
2025-08-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/09685332251362405
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.65

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

AI in healthcare: Regulatory guidelines and judge-made negligence principles for AI implementers

Gary Kok Yew Chan
1 citations
Medical Law International
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
0.65
article

AI in healthcare: Regulatory guidelines and judge-made negligence principles for AI implementers

Gary Kok Yew Chan
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare may, notwithstanding its potential benefits, result in harm to patients from allegedly negligent acts or omissions by hospitals and medical doctors. In such circumstances, how should the principles in the tort of negligence (duty of care, breach, causation, remoteness of damage, and defences) respond to AI innovations in healthcare? In particular, how may the standard of care expected of hospitals and medical doctors be informed by regulatory guidelines? We refer to case law precedents and regulatory guidelines on the roles and responsibilities of doctors and hospitals as AI implementers. Importantly, they prompt further reflection and consideration as to how regulatory guidelines can impact the application of judge-made principles in negligence in connection with, for example, the reliance on medical AI in clinical practice, the disclosure of AI usage and risks to patients and the challenges posed by the opacity and non-explainability of medical AI.

Medical Law International
Singapore Management University (SG)
Lee Foundation
Openalex Percentile: Top 22%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
0.65
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

AI in healthcare: Regulatory guidelines and judge-made negligence principles for AI implementers — Gary Kok Yew Chan · Medical Law International (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS