Examining developer perspectives on medical AI regulatory frameworks.
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 42103977.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1038/s41746-026-02689-0.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Regulatory frameworks ensure the trustworthiness of artificial intelligence in medicine (AI-MD). Yet, developers' perspectives on these frameworks remain underexplored. We surveyed 122 AI-MD developers online, examining their awareness, familiarity, and adoption of regulatory frameworks, alongside their views on ethical principles and stakeholder responsibilities. About half (57.4%, n = 70) were aware of any frameworks while reporting moderate familiarity. A third (33.6%, n = 41) indicated that their organizations had formally adopted such frameworks. Developers identified robustness as the most critical ethical principle and viewed themselves as primarily responsible for implementing regulatory standards. Independent t-tests indicated marginal and significant differences in awareness (p = 0.051) and familiarity (p < 0.001), respectively, between developers from adopting and non-adopting organizations. Senior and junior developers differed significantly on both measures (p < 0.05). These findings highlight developers' strong sense of professional accountability but also reveal limited familiarity and adoption, underscoring the need for greater education and organizational support to foster responsible AI-MD practices.