Artificial intelligence translation in healthcare: an urgent call for evidence-informed policy frameworks.

IF 6.2 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Chukwuebuka Anyaegbuna, Natasha Steele, April Shichu Liang, Stephen P Ma, Ivan Lopez, Nymisha Chilukuri, Kavita Patel, Kevin Schulman, Jonathan H Chen
{"title":"Artificial intelligence translation in healthcare: an urgent call for evidence-informed policy frameworks.","authors":"Chukwuebuka Anyaegbuna, Natasha Steele, April Shichu Liang, Stephen P Ma, Ivan Lopez, Nymisha Chilukuri, Kavita Patel, Kevin Schulman, Jonathan H Chen","doi":"10.1136/bmjhci-2025-102007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) translation tools in healthcare is accelerating rapidly, yet regulatory frameworks lag dangerously behind clinical practice. Recent data reveal that 57% of US physicians are already using or planning to adopt AI translation services within the next year. This creates a critical policy vacuum where clinicians deploy tools with variable performance across languages, risking patient safety and deepening health inequities. We examine the fractured regulatory landscape, document performance disparities between well-resourced and digitally under-represented languages, and argue for an urgent, evidence-informed policy framework centred on patient comprehension rather than linguistic accuracy.We delineate a risk-stratified validation approach comprising two distinct tracks: a 'Streamlined Pathway' for tool-language combinations with robust existing evidence (eg, Spanish) and a 'Standard Pathway' requiring independent, prospective validation for digitally under-represented languages (eg, Haitian Creole). To ensure accountability, we propose establishing oversight bodies within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) or the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to mandate pre-deployment validation and post-market monitoring. Without such action, AI translation risks creating a two-tier system where the 25.7 million Americans with non-English language preferences receive dramatically different care quality based solely on the language they speak.</p>","PeriodicalId":9050,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Health & Care Informatics","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12918658/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Health & Care Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2025-102007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) translation tools in healthcare is accelerating rapidly, yet regulatory frameworks lag dangerously behind clinical practice. Recent data reveal that 57% of US physicians are already using or planning to adopt AI translation services within the next year. This creates a critical policy vacuum where clinicians deploy tools with variable performance across languages, risking patient safety and deepening health inequities. We examine the fractured regulatory landscape, document performance disparities between well-resourced and digitally under-represented languages, and argue for an urgent, evidence-informed policy framework centred on patient comprehension rather than linguistic accuracy.We delineate a risk-stratified validation approach comprising two distinct tracks: a 'Streamlined Pathway' for tool-language combinations with robust existing evidence (eg, Spanish) and a 'Standard Pathway' requiring independent, prospective validation for digitally under-represented languages (eg, Haitian Creole). To ensure accountability, we propose establishing oversight bodies within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) or the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to mandate pre-deployment validation and post-market monitoring. Without such action, AI translation risks creating a two-tier system where the 25.7 million Americans with non-English language preferences receive dramatically different care quality based solely on the language they speak.

医疗保健中的人工智能翻译:紧急呼吁建立循证政策框架。
人工智能(AI)翻译工具在医疗保健领域的部署正在迅速加速,但监管框架却严重落后于临床实践。最近的数据显示,57%的美国医生已经在使用或计划在明年采用人工智能翻译服务。这造成了一个关键的政策真空,临床医生在不同语言之间部署不同性能的工具,这将危及患者安全并加剧卫生不平等。我们研究了支离破碎的监管格局,记录了资源充足和数字代表性不足的语言之间的表现差异,并主张建立一个紧急的、循证的政策框架,以患者理解为中心,而不是语言准确性。我们描述了一种风险分层验证方法,包括两种不同的路径:一种是“流线型路径”,用于具有可靠现有证据的工具语言组合(如西班牙语),另一种是“标准路径”,要求对数字代表性不足的语言(如海地克里奥尔语)进行独立的前瞻性验证。为了确保问责制,我们建议在美国卫生与公众服务部(HHS)或食品和药物管理局(FDA)内建立监督机构,以强制执行部署前验证和上市后监督。如果不采取这样的行动,人工智能翻译可能会创造一个双层系统,在这个系统中,2570万非英语语言偏好的美国人仅根据他们所说的语言就会获得截然不同的护理质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
4.90%
发文量
40
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书