2026· Journal of Advanced Artificial Intelligence, Engineering and Technology· Vol 02, pp. 01· 0 citations
TL;DR
Clinical AI systems operate under constraints that extend beyond typical production settings, and technical robustness alone is insufficient; governance and accountability become integral system properties.
Abstract
Machine Learning Operations (MLOps) practices have reached a notable level of maturity within general-purpose software engineering. Pipelines are standardized, monitoring is automated and deployment patterns are well rehearsed. Yet when these same practices are transferred into clinical environments, their adequacy becomes less certain. The healthcare domain introduces operational and ethical pressures that conventional MLOps frameworks were not originally designed to address.
Clinical AI systems operate under constraints that extend beyond typical production settings. Stringent data protection regimes including GDPR and the EU AI Act shape how data can be processed and retained. Model drift is not merely a statistical inconvenience; it may alter clinical decisions with tangible consequences for patient outcomes. Regulatory compliance demands comprehensive, tamper-evident audit trails. At the same time, decision-critical contexts impose a clear expectation of human oversight. In other words, technical robustness alone is insufficient; governance and accountability become integral system properties.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is moving from research prototypes into clinical workflows, yet the deployment of AI systems that process protected health information (PHI) remains constrained by the U.S. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and by the absence of shared engineering guidance for sati...
Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) standardizes clinical exchange but does not establish that a downstream artificial intelligence (AI) use remains authorized, semantically consistent, or accountable. This Hypothesis and Theory article proposes evidence-continuous boundary control: a material data, model...
Femi Oke· Frontiers in Digital Health· 0 citations
A critical review examines the intersection of predictive analytics and artificial intelligence and governance at the intersection of these fields, drawing on peer-reviewed literature identified through structured searching of bibliographic metadata registries and biomedical indexes to 1 June 2026.
O. Adewuyi, Moshood Khairah Olayinka· Journal of Advances in Medic...· 0 citations
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
Escalating healthcare costs continue to challenge hospitals, insurers, and patients, while administrative complexity and fragmented operational workflows limit the effectiveness of traditional cost-control strategies. This manuscript introduces a conceptual framework for AI-assisted optimization of hospital resource ma...
This work proposes nine operational measures - covering transparency-oriented risk and change control, traceability, subgroup and independent validation, usability-based explainability, calibrated clinical evaluation, structured labeling, version-controlled updates, and regulated end-of-life data handling - to support...
E. Bianchini, L. Billeci, Noemi Conditi et al.· Expert Review of Medical Dev...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.