Aug 2026· 2026 7th International Conference on Big Data Analytics and Practices (IBDAP)· pp. 1-6· 0 citations· 13 references
Abstract
This study delves into key policy issues required for the regulation of Generative AI in high-stakes domains such as enterprise management and clinical health care. As more and more organizations deploy large language models in their tools and systems for automation, decision support, or patient care, questions of data privacy, algorithmic bias, and transparency in decision-making processes are crucial. A curated data set of 397 cases of AI failures and successes in different corporate and medical departments is used in this study. We are employing mixed methods (qualitative risk assessment instruments and quantitative performance measures) to analyse the effect of governance arrangements on the operational effectiveness and ethics. Our findings indicate that decentralized governance of data can lead to increased risks in managing data, and that data governance with a human-in-the-loop can significantly enhance data diagnostics and compliance to company policies. The study offers a blueprint for action for policymakers on the need to adopt effective guardrails to balance innovation with safety. The identified key bottlenecks in generative systems' integration are extracted from the technical logs and policy documentation in the dataset. Finally, it is important to emphasize that a multidisciplinary governance approach should be promoted, considering the ethical transparency and institutional accountability aspects, and a permanent and dynamic monitoring of the generative technologies should be maintained in professional contexts, due to the natural dynamism of these technologies.
Abstract Objective Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies are being rapidly adopted in healthcare, yet organisational governance often lacks the processes needed to oversee their safe and responsible use. Previous AI governance frameworks largely focus on high-level AI ethics principles, leaving healthcare organisat...
S. Freeman, Amy Wang, Sudeep Saraf et al.· BMJ digital health & AI· 0 citations
This case study examines the governance challenges associated with AI-enabled HR decision-making in an organizational context and highlights the importance of continuous AI auditing, meaningful human oversight, and clearly defined organizational responsibilities for responsible and sustainable AI governance frameworks...
Jaganathan Balaji· Indian Journal of Computer S...· 0 citations
The evidence shows strong convergence around fairness, transparency, privacy, accountability, human oversight, safety and inclusiveness, but weaker agreement on implementation, and an integrated framework for developing, deploying and monitoring AI systems in ways that are lawful, transparent, accountable, inclusive an...
Sunday Olusola Ladipo, Ifaka Queen Inazu· Direct Research Journal of E...· 0 citations
Key applications in diagnostics, disease surveillance, supply chain management, and telemedicine are examined, highlighting how AI improves decision-making, resource allocation, and access to care and the findings suggest that the transformative potential of AI depends on strong governance frameworks, institutional cap...
The proposed Lifecycle-Integrated Healthcare AI Governance Framework (LIHAG), a four-layer deployment-oriented governance model integrating technical robustness, ethical safeguards, regulatory compliance, regulatory compliance, and human oversight as interdependent dimensions of responsible AI deployment is proposed.
Shehu Mohammed, Neha Malhotra, Sourabh Kumar· AI and Ethics· 0 citations
A notable disparity between the claimed behaviours and the observed improvements is revealed, as well as in the formalisation of governance for AI ethics, in Swiss health organisations.
Heidi Lee, Sara Kijewski, Agata Ferretti et al.· AI and Ethics· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.