The AMA has policies and guidance on trustworthy augmented intelligence (AI) in medicine. Now the AMA will redouble its efforts to ensure that medical students, residents, fellows and physicians in practice have access to the training and CME they need to harness the power of health AI tools while ensuring that those tools are designed, developed, and deployed ethically and responsibly.
Peer-reviewed studies and surveys across specialties show trainees are already using AI tools and that they believe the tools will play a future role in care, according to a resolution introduced at the Interim Meeting. Medical students and physicians in training also want formal training about health AI that includes ethics, bias mitigation, evaluation and safe workflow integration.
To address those needs, delegates adopted new policy to support “developing and disseminating model AI learning objectives and curricular toolkits aligned with existing AMA policy and AAMC [Association of American Medical Colleges] principles.”
The House of Delegates also directed the AMA to:
- Collaborate with medical organizations to recognize AI literacy elements where appropriate.
- Support CME offerings to upskill the current workforce.
- Advocate funding and faculty-development resources to implement and evaluate AI training initiatives.
“As AI becomes increasingly embedded across health care, we face an urgent need for a standardized educational framework that emphasizes patient safety, transparency, and accuracy,” said AMA CEO and Executive Vice President John Whyte, MD, MPH. “Just as medical students learn anatomy and physiology, they must also understand how AI tools function, their limitations, and their potential to support clinical care. A strong foundation in AI education will help ensure these technologies are used in ways that improve patient care, reduce administrative burdens, and restore physician satisfaction in practicing medicine.”
From AI implementation to digital health adoption and EHR usability, the AMA is fighting to make technology work for physicians, ensuring that it is an asset to doctors. That includes recently launching the AMA Center for Digital Health and AI to give physicians a powerful voice in shaping how AI and other digital tools are harnessed to improve the patient and clinician experience.
During an Interim Meeting education session on health AI, Dr. Whyte said he believes the new center will be one of his most important initiatives at the AMA.
“That is because, as we think about our AMA motto—‘To promote the art and science of medicine and the betterment of public health’—how we use these tools and technologies as we deliver care, as we learn how to become doctors and practice medicine, are critically important,” he said. “And physicians have to lead in this space.”
Weighing in on deepfakes
Deepfake technology is one facet of AI that, in particular, needs more regulatory guidance. While such technology might be useful in medical education, training or patient engagement, there are a plethora of pitfalls.
Deepfake “doctors” garner millions of views on social media, endorsing products for their creators’ financial gain while jeopardizing patient safety or exposing patients to serious harm. Meanwhile, that type of deepfake content puts the foundation of the patient-physician relationship—built on accurate information, trust, professionalism and authenticity—under direct threat.
“The foundation of the patient-physician relationship is built on accurate information, trust, professionalism, and authenticity, all of which are under direct threat from deepfake content, which misleads patients and undermines their confidence in medical practice,” Dr. Whyte said.
In an effort to thwart the harm that deepfake technology can cause patients and physicians, delegates adopted new policy to:
- Recognize that while there are documented advantages of deepfake technology for medical education, training, and patient engagement, there currently exists a significant regulatory void, and such lack of oversight can result in harmful consequences, including the manipulation of patients, the spread of misinformation and the potential for injury or death.
- Support relevant organizations—including health care professionals, technology developers, government regulators, social media platforms and the public—to formulate comprehensive federal legislation and regulations regarding deepfake technology to uphold the integrity of the medical profession against malpractice, increase awareness of the risks associated with deepfake content, and safeguard patient well-being across all communities.
Balance needed on medical results release
The House of Delegates also took action on a variety of issues aimed at making sure health technology delivers on what patients and physicians need. One of these relates to the need to strike a better balance on when and how patients are electronically notified of medical results and reports.
The federal information-blocking rule’s mandate that patients get immediate access to their electronic health information had good intent behind it—improving transparency and empowering patients. But sometimes when a patient sees the information on the computer screen without a physician’s explanation, it can lead to distress, confusion and a potential erosion of the patient-physician relationship, according to an AMA Board of Trustees report whose recommendations were adopted.
The information-blocking rule, an outgrowth of the 21st Century Cures Act, allows delaying release of results if doing so would cause physical harm. But physicians said that more needs to be done to prevent patients from being delivered news through the EHR that could cause emotional and psychological harm, including results that indicate debilitating, life-limiting or terminal illnesses.
“In balancing the goal of minimizing patient distress with the patient’s legal right to timely access to medical reports and results, the AMA must advocate for clear, narrowly tailored policies that respect both clinical judgment and patient autonomy,” the report says.
To address concerns, the delegates adopted new policy to support the:
- Use of patient-directed, short-term embargoes for results.
- Individual tailoring of preferences for release of such information, consistent with the harm exception to the information-blocking rule.
- Ability of patients to request physician or surrogate review of reports and results prior to their release, when consistent with the harm exception to the information-blocking rule.
Telehealth licensure across state lines
As telehealth innovation continues to evolve, there’s a need for additional licensure exceptions for physicians using telehealth to prospectively screen patients for complex referrals, and physicians working on and recruiting patients for clinical trials, according to an AMA Council on Medical Service report whose recommendations were adopted.
“There must be clear lines of accountability in licensure policies to protect patients, and that licensure of physicians and other health professionals should remain within the purview of each state, which is the prevailing standard,” the council report says. “At the same time, AMA policy needs to keep pace with telehealth innovations, including those that lessen geographic barriers to care by enabling patients to access medical services not available close to home.”
To keep up with changes in the field, delegates modified existing policy to support exemption from licensure requirements for physicians:
- Assessing or screening out-of-state patients for acceptance of a referral to a center for excellence or to a physician with specific expertise in the patient’s condition, as selected by the referring physician and patient.
- Screening out-of-state patients for acceptance into a clinical trial that meets relevant federal, state, and ethical standards as well as those outlined in AMA policy.
- Conducting assessments of out-of-state patients that are required as part of a clinical trial, provided that: the trial meets relevant federal, state and ethical standards as well as those outlined in AMA policy; the assessments are not intended to establish or replace care for the patient outside of the context of the trial; physicians planning to use telehealth identify a physician licensed in the patient’s state to address in-person care needs that may arise from the clinical trial.
Read about the other highlights from the 2025 AMA Interim Meeting.
