AI scribes are rapidly entering healthcare, offering efficiency gains but introducing new privacy, accuracy, and governance risks. The Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario makes it clear that PHIPA obligations still apply. This article outlines key risks, regulatory expectations, and what healthcare organizations must do to use AI scribes responsibly.

Many organizations assume AI governance only applies if they build their own models. In reality, most risk comes from off-the-shelf and embedded AI tools. This practical playbook explains where third-party AI risk actually lives and how to implement real governance controls without slowing teams down.

This article examines the EU AI Act, which introduces a risk-based regulatory framework for artificial intelligence (AI) by categorizing applications into four risk levels: unacceptable, high, limited, and minimal risk. It highlights the need to balance innovation and safety, particularly for high-risk systems that require stringent compliance measures. Additionally, the article discusses tiered regulations for general-purpose AI models based on their risks. Ultimately, the EU AI Act aims to create a secure environment for AI innovation while providing clear guidelines to protect users and adapt to evolving technologies.

With the increased use of AI, particularly in the workplace, and legislation coming in (irrespective of whether legislation governs the use of AI right now), there is a risk to your business if you do not regulate how your employees use it.

Operationalizing facial recognition and remaining privacy compliant

Embedding Privacy Into Machine Learning

Finding the Middle Ground between Privacy and Artificial Intelligence