Medical AI has supplanted nurses and evaded its own regulatory checks.
The argument for medical AI is that it allows clinicians to focus more on patient care. However, two recent incidents indicate a different reality. In New York, nurses claim they have been replaced by software, while a former leader from the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota asserts that the software is not reliable.
Marilyn Shuler dedicated 39 years to reviewing patient charts at Montefiore hospital in the Bronx. This month, she was among a dozen nurses laid off, having been replaced by AI software that performs part of their tasks, according to their union. The nurses were responsible for utilization review, which involved examining charts and negotiating with insurers about covered care. The New York State Nurses Association argues that the layoffs violated a contract recently secured through a strike, as reported by the Guardian.
“It should also concern every practitioner and patient who cares about... the quality of care they receive,” stated Shaiju Kalathil, a nurse at Montefiore and union representative. Montefiore contests this narrative, labeling the union's claims as “inaccurate and misleading” and claiming that the changes pertain to a nonclinical paperwork program.
If the situation in New York involves job loss, Minnesota's scenario relates to trust, and it is more troubling. Traci Tamiko Eto joined the Mayo Clinic in 2023 to help create safeguards for its AI. In a new lawsuit, she alleges that the hospital demoted her and subsequently terminated her for raising concerns about the AI implementation, as reported by Minnesota Public Radio.
Her allegations are detailed. She claims that the group behind an AI assistant named MAYA deleted unfavorable test results, exaggerated the tool’s capabilities, and advanced it without adequate oversight. According to the lawsuit, the tool had an error rate as high as 67% at one point.
Mayo asserts its commitment to responsible AI, with privacy, security, and compliance as central elements of its practices. However, if Eto’s account is validated in court, it reveals a system hastily moved past necessary checks to identify errors.
These two instances represent isolated cases rather than a broader trend, yet they reflect a shared underlying issue. Healthcare was anticipated to showcase the clearest benefits of AI, making its failures particularly unacceptable. An erroneous advertisement may be embarrassing, but an incorrect chart poses serious risks.
The broader situation is already concerning. In Utah, AI has been allowed to renew prescriptions without a doctor’s involvement. Studies continue to show that relying on AI can subtly diminish the skills that professionals are expected to maintain, shortening career paths for experienced individuals. Companies like Allianz and Thomson Reuters have begun replacing employees with AI models.
The common thread throughout these cases is the distribution of risk. Montefiore benefits financially from the layoffs; patients face the consequences of any software errors. Mayo gains efficiency, while, according to the whistleblower, she lost her job.
Neither situation has been adjudicated in court, and both hospitals defend their practices. Yet, together they challenge the tidy narrative that medical AI serves only to provide assistance. At times, it also eliminates human roles. Often, the individual most knowledgeable about the machine is the first to be dismissed.
Other articles
Medical AI has supplanted nurses and evaded its own regulatory checks.
Two cases in the US highlight the negative aspects of medical AI: nurses at Montefiore were substituted by software, and a whistleblower from Mayo Clinic claims that a tool has a 67% error rate.
