The paper discusses how autonomous AI systems are moving from advisory to agentic roles in medication prescribing, citing recent U.S. legislation and a Utah pilot program. It argues that three architectural features—calibrated per‑prediction confidence, clear differentiation between epistemic and aleatoric uncertainty, and inferential transparency—are essential for safe autonomous prescribing. A survey of 136 U.S. clinicians shows they require a confidence‑based escalation mechanism, prefer different handling of uncertainty types, and will only accept liability when transparency allows informed decision‑making.
arXiv:2606. 26298v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Autonomous AI agents may begin to perform consequential, irreversible actions such as clinical prescribing and production software deployment.
arXiv:2608. 03114v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into medical decision-making, yet its liability implications remain complex, particularly when physicians differ in diagnostic skills and their quality is unobservable.
arXiv:2606. 30658v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Medical AI has shifted from reasoning to agentic AI, a new paradigm that autonomously invokes external tools during reasoning, rendering intermediate reasoning steps and tool outputs transparent to users.
arXiv:2608. 13618v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A single clinical algorithm can deliver unequal accuracy across patient groups, and concern about such disparity has grown as artificial intelligence (AI) spreads through clinical decision-making.
arXiv:2608. 03028v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Applying a valid medication-safety rule when its patient-specific conditions are not met can produce an incorrect decision.
arXiv:2608. 12360v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Background: AI/ML-enabled medical devices are increasingly deployed in healthcare under evolving regulatory frameworks.
arXiv:2606. 00044v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The integration of artificial intelligence into clinical medicine creates a fundamental tension between algorithmic probabilistic reasoning and the experiential intuition of expert physicians; applying Lawrence Lessig's \enquote{Code is Law} framework, I argue that the architecture of clinical AI systems already functions as de facto medical regulation, reshaping liability and the standard of care.
arXiv:2607. 28677v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM now pass medical licensing examinations and, in curated cases, can rival physicians at diagnostic reasoning.
arXiv:2601. 16529v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) deployed in clinical decision support may acquiesce to patient requests for care that conflicts with evidence-based guidelines.
arXiv:2508. 07617v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: AI has the potential to augment human decision making.
AI Morbidity and Mortality (AI M&M) is a structured, blameless framework designed to review clinical AI failures. It combines standardized case intake, evidence preservation, investigator reconstruction, tool‑in‑loop attribution, and corrective‑action tracking, classifying each event across four linked dimensions: Trigger, Mechanism, Clinical Pathway, and Corrective Action. The authors demonstrate the framework with five outpatient medication and clinical decision‑support cases, achieving full agreement among reviewers on all classification axes.
The paper introduces VERDICT, an LLM-based agent that converts clinical trial matching tasks into SMT problems to ensure consistent policy application and accountable decisions. VERDICT outperforms other LLM-only and neurosymbolic baselines on accuracy, achieves perfect policy consistency, and generates clinician-preferred rationales grounded in explicit assumptions and pivotal conditions. It also demonstrates improved counterfactual self‑faithfulness, meaning changes in pivotal conditions appropriately alter decisions.