What if arthritis sufferers could take an immersive walk through a forest filled with soothing birdsong and then, with some help from hypnosis, come to experience their pain as separate from their body – and expel it?
That’s the goal of research led by David Ogez, a professor in the Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine at Université de Montréal and a clinical researcher at the Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital Research Centre.
Together with postdoctoral researcher Valentyn Fournier, Ogez is testing an approach that combines medical hypnosis and virtual reality (VR) to help seniors manage chronic arthritis pain in the hands, a common and debilitating condition.
Their research was published online last month in BMJ Open.
“Chronic pain is a major public-health issue that affects about one in five people in Canada and as many as one in three over the age of 60,” said Ogez. “It significantly impacts quality of life, mobility and mental health. But apart from pharmacological treatments, solutions are few.”
The problem lies in the limitations of drug treatments, including the risk of addiction to painkillers. This led Ogez and his team to explore complementary, non-invasive methods to help patients better manage their pain.
A powerful duo
Medical hypnosis is already recognized as an effective pain management tool, particularly in palliative care and post-operative settings. It relies on hypnotic suggestion—guided phrases that help patients alter their sensory and emotional perception of pain.
For example, patients may be asked to imagine submerging their sore hand in cold water, or be guided through controlled breathing techniques to synchronize their heartbeat and breathing to induce relaxation.
Ogez’s team wanted to take it one step further by combining the power of hypnosis with immersive virtual experiences.
Wearing a headset, the patient is transported to a Quebec landscape—a forest, mountains, a beach—accompanied by music and the sounds of nature. Developed in Quebec, this application was originally designed to give end-of-life patients the opportunity to “visit” places they never had the chance to see in real life.
Pairing hypnosis and VR makes it possible to visualize and manipulate pain, allowing patients to reclaim control of their bodies and their pain, research has shown.
One intervention being tested is the “magic hand.” In virtual reality, patients look at their hand and put little sparkles on the painful area to alleviate the pain. Another intervention involves guiding patients to “objectify” their pain: to make it visible on their hand and then remove it.
“The pain is still there, but…”
The researchers are also interested in the physiological mechanisms responsible for the pain relief provided by these techniques, which may resemble those associated with mindfulness.
One hypothesis is that VR distracts the brain. By intensely engaging vision, hearing and concentration, VR redirects mental resources that would otherwise be mobilized by pain. Hypnosis then reinforces this diversion of attention by guiding the patient toward pleasant sensations and gradual relief.
Neuroscience research has shown that these techniques modulate the activity of the anterior cingulate cortex and primary somatosensory cortex, two brain regions involved in the emotional and perceptual processing of pain.
“The pain is still there, but its unpleasantness and intensity are reduced,” explained Ogez.
Exposure to nature also provides psychological benefits. “Nature refreshes attention, directing the mind away from negative stimuli and restoring our ability to focus on positive ones,” said Fournier.
Promising preliminary results
Beyond the immediate calming or distracting effects of a treatment session combining hypnosis and VR, the new research aims to help patients develop self-hypnosis skills they can use at home.
The team is also working on developing a neurofeedback tool that patients can use to track and regulate their brain activity in real time in order to help them modulate their physiological responses during immersive VR experiences.
While the study is presently in the randomized clinical trial phase, the preliminary feedback from participants is encouraging, said Ogez.
“We’re seeing good patient satisfaction, although we mustn’t confuse satisfaction with effectiveness,” he cautioned. “Still, we’re hopeful, since pain is partly a subjective experience.”
As artificial intelligence (AI) increasingly enters the mental health space, from therapy chatbots to diagnostic tools, the world faces a critical question: can AI expand access to care without putting people at risk?
At the G20 Social Summit in Johannesburg, South Africa announced a landmark national effort to answer that question. The South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) and PATH, with funding from Wellcome, have launched the Comprehensive AI Regulation and Evaluation for Mental Health (CARE MH) program to develop the world’s first regulatory framework for artificial intelligence in mental health.
CARE MH will establish a science-based and ethically robust regulatory framework that describes how AI tools need to be evaluated for safety, inclusivity, and effectiveness before they can be given market authorization and made available to potential service users. It aims to strengthen trust in digital health innovation and will serve as a model for other countries seeking to strike a balance between innovation and oversight.
“You wouldn’t give your child or loved one a vaccine or drug that hadn’t been tested or evaluated for safety,” saidBilal Mateen, Chief AI Officer at PATH. “We’re working to bring that same standard of rigorous evaluation to AI tools in mental health, because trust must be earned, not assumed.”
The framework will be developed and tested in South Africa, with the intention of extending its application across the African continent and to international partners.
“SAHPRA is proud to lead the development of Africa’s first regulatory framework for AI in mental health linked directly to market authorization,” said Christelna Reynecke, Chief Operations Officer of SAHPRA. “Our true goal is even more ambitious, though; we want to create a regulatory environment for AI4health in general, one that keeps pace with innovation, grounded in scientific rigor, ethical oversight, and public accountability.”
“Millions of people across the globe are being held back by mental health problems, which are projected to become the world’s biggest health burden by 2030,” said Professor Miranda Wolpert MBE, Director of Mental Health at Wellcome. “CARE MH is a vital step toward ensuring that AI technologies in this space are safe, effective, and equitable.”
The goal is simple: help more people, safely.
Through CARE MH, the partners behind this initiative are setting the foundation for the next generation of ethical, evidence-based AI in mental health. Supported by global experts from the following institutions: Audere Africa, African Health Research Institute, the UK’s Centre for Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation for AI & Digital Health, the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, University of Birmingham, University of Washington, and the Wits Health Consortium, CARE MH is built to protect and empower people everywhere.
By Vishal Barapatre, Group Chief Technology Officer at In2IT Technologies
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is revolutionising healthcare as profoundly as the discovery of antibiotics or the invention of the stethoscope. From analysing X-rays in seconds to predicting disease outbreaks and tailoring treatment plans to individual patients, AI has opened new possibilities for precision medicine and increased efficiency. In emergency rooms, AI-driven diagnostic tools are already helping doctors detect heart attacks or strokes faster than human eyes alone.
However, as AI systems become increasingly embedded in the patient journey, from diagnosis to aftercare, they raise critical ethical questions. Who is accountable when an algorithm gets it wrong? How can we ensure that patient data remains confidential in the era of cloud computing? And how can healthcare institutions, often stretched thin on resources, balance innovation with responsibility?
When algorithms diagnose: the promise and the problem
AI’s strength lies in its ability to process massive amounts of data, such as medical histories, imaging scans, and lab results, and detect patterns that human clinicians might miss. This can dramatically improve diagnostic accuracy and treatment outcomes. For instance, AI models trained on thousands of mammogram images can help identify subtle indicators of breast cancer earlier than traditional methods.
However, the same data that powers AI can also introduce bias. If the datasets used to train an algorithm are skewed, say, over-representing one demographic group, the results may unfairly disadvantage others. A diagnostic model trained primarily on data from urban hospitals, for example, might misinterpret symptoms in patients from rural areas or underrepresented ethnic groups. Bias in healthcare AI isn’t just a technical flaw; it’s an ethical hazard with real-world consequences for patient trust and equity.
The privacy paradox
The integration of AI in healthcare requires access to vast quantities of sensitive data. This creates a privacy paradox: the more data AI consumes, the smarter it becomes, but the greater the risk to patient confidentiality. The digitisation of health records, combined with AI’s hunger for data, exposes systems to new vulnerabilities. A single breach can compromise thousands of medical histories, potentially leading to identity theft or misuse of personal health information. The paradox underscores the need for robust data protection measures in AI-driven healthcare systems.
Striking a balance between data utility and privacy protection has become one of the healthcare industry’s most pressing ethical dilemmas. Encryption, anonymisation, and strict access controls are essential, but technology alone isn’t enough. Patients need transparency: clear explanations of how their data is used, who has access to it, and what safeguards are in place. Ethical AI requires not only compliance with regulations but also the cultivation of trust through open communication.
Accountability in the age of automation
When an AI system makes a medical recommendation, who is ultimately responsible for the outcome – the algorithm’s developer, the healthcare provider, or the institution that deployed it? The opacity of AI decision-making, often referred to as the “black box” problem, complicates accountability and transparency. Clinicians may rely on algorithmic outputs without fully understanding how conclusions were reached. This can blur the line between human and machine judgment.
Accountability must therefore be clearly defined. Human oversight should remain central to any AI-powered decision, ensuring that technology supports rather than replaces clinical expertise. Ethical frameworks that mandate explainability, where AI systems must provide understandable reasoning for their outputs, are key to maintaining trust. Moreover, continuous auditing of AI models, which involves regularly reviewing and testing the system performance, can help detect and correct biases or errors before they lead to harm, thereby ensuring the ongoing ethical use of AI in healthcare.
Behind the code: who keeps AI ethical
While hospitals and clinics focus on patient care, many lack the internal capacity to manage the complex ethical, security, and technical demands of AI adoption. This is where third-party IT providers play a pivotal role. These partners act as the backbone of responsible innovation, ensuring that AI systems are implemented securely and ethically.
By embedding ethical principles into system design, such as fairness, transparency, and accountability, IT providers help healthcare institutions mitigate risks before they become crises. They also play a crucial role in securing sensitive data through advanced encryption protocols, cybersecurity monitoring, and compliance management. In many ways, they serve as both architects and custodians of ethical AI, ensuring that the pursuit of innovation does not compromise patient welfare.
Building a culture of ethical innovation
Ultimately, the ethics of AI in healthcare extend beyond technology; they are about culture and leadership. Hospitals and healthcare networks must foster environments where ethical reflection is as integral as technical innovation. This involves establishing multidisciplinary ethics committees, conducting bias audits, and training clinicians to critically evaluate and question AI outputs rather than accepting them without examination.
The future of AI in healthcare depends not on how advanced our algorithms become, but on how wisely we use them. Ethical frameworks, transparent governance, and responsible partnerships with IT providers can transform AI from a potential risk into a powerful ally. As the healthcare sector continues to evolve, the institutions that will thrive are those that remember that technology should serve humanity, not the other way around.
By Henry Adams, Country Manager, InterSystems South Africa
When people think about artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare, they often picture complex machines in high-tech hospitals. But some of the most exciting uses of AI are happening in primary care, right at the first point of contact between doctor and patient.
Globally, AI is helping general practitioners, nurses, and clinicians make faster, more accurate decisions by giving them access to clean, connected data. It helps detect early signs of disease, spot patterns across patient populations, and ensure the right people get the right care sooner.
South Africa is not there yet, but that is exactly why we should be paying attention.
Learning from what is working elsewhere
In countries where healthcare data is already digitised and connected, AI-assisted tools are starting to prove their worth. In parts of Europe, AI systems are helping GPs analyse symptoms, lab results and patient histories to identify possible conditions much earlier. In the US, data platforms are used to surface insights from millions of patient records, helping clinicians identify patterns that might otherwise go unnoticed.
At InterSystems, we have seen firsthand how this combination of reliable data and intelligent technology is changing the way care is delivered. In the UK, our data platform helps care providers securely connect across places of care to patient information across multiple systems, making it easier for AI tools to interpret symptoms in context. In France, AI-assisted prescriptions through partners like Posos are helping doctors reduce errors and improve treatment safety.
These examples show what is possible when data, people and technology come together in the right way.
Why data comes first
AI is only as powerful as the data it works with. If a clinician’s system lacks complete or up-to-date patient information, the AI cannot provide reliable support. That is why data quality and interoperability are so important; they form the foundation for everything else.
Many countries that are seeing success with AI in primary care started by getting their data in order, building connected health records, standardising information, and ensuring privacy and compliance at every step. Once those pieces were in place, they could start introducing AI tools that help doctors and nurses make better decisions without adding extra admin or complexity.
Again, in South Africa, we are not quite there yet, but we are heading in the right direction. There are ongoing efforts to digitise health records and bring together fragmented systems. As that process continues, it will open the door for more advanced AI-driven support tools, from diagnosis assistance to population health management.
What this could mean for South Africa
Imagine a community clinic in Limpopo or the Eastern Cape, where a doctor sees dozens of patients a day. With AI support, they could instantly access each patient’s medical history, flag high-risk symptoms, or receive early alerts about potential complications like diabetes or hypertension.
AI will not replace the doctor’s or their judgment. It simply gives them more context and better information. It is like having a quiet assistant in the background, helping spot what is easy to miss when you are under pressure.
This kind of technology could also help identify broader health trends, guiding public health decisions and making sure resources are sent where they are needed most. It is not about high-end tech for big hospitals, it is about making everyday healthcare smarter, safer and more efficient for everyone.
Building the foundations
Before we can get there, we need to focus on the basics: connected systems, reliable data, and trust. AI tools cannot function properly in silos. They need access to consistent, secure information, the kind that interoperable platforms like InterSystems IRIS for Health are designed to manage.
Once we have that in place, the rest becomes achievable. Doctors can use AI to compare patient data against proven medical knowledge bases. Clinics can share insights securely across regions. And the healthcare system becomes more proactive instead of reactive.
It is easy to look at what is happening overseas and feel that South Africa is far behind. But I see it differently. Every success story abroad gives us a roadmap, lessons we can adapt to our own realities. We do not have to reinvent the wheel; we just have to make sure it is fit for our local terrain.
By Thom Renwick, General Manager, Roche Pharma South Africa
Early screening and treatment. Much higher survival rates. And savings in the billions of dollars. From AI-powered medicine development to teleconsultations, technology can boost Africans’ health and livelihoods while growing economic and social impact across the continent.
Access to quality healthcare is fundamental to leading a fruitful, economically active life. Yet, breast cancer is still the number one cancer killer of women in Africa – in most cases, while they’re still in their prime. Tragically, most are diagnosed too late for curative treatment.
Across the continent, non-communicable diseases – such as treatable breast cancer – cause hundreds of thousands of preventable deaths every year[1], devastating families and hampering economic growth.
Global projections indicate a worrying 38% rise in incidence of breast cancer and a 68% increase in deaths by 2050 without urgent intervention, with the least developed countries being the most affected, according to a new white paper[2] by independent German economic think tank the WifOR Institute.
The Value of Investing in Innovative Medicines report outlines the economic burden from not treating the aggressive HER2-positive type of breast cancer over five years in seven African countries – South Africa, Kenya, Nigeria, Algeria, Tunisia, Côte d’Ivoire and Morocco. The findings are staggering, indicating a $10.3-billion loss in productivity from 2017 to 2023.[3]
The data also shows that, in Africa, 89% of the economic burden of HER2-positive breast cancer – representing 15% to 20% of all breast cancer cases around the world – falls on women of working age.[4]
It goes beyond economics. Mothers hold households together and when they die that has huge ramifications for entire families and communities.
In sub-Saharan Africa, every 100 deaths among women under 50 leave around 210 children without their mothers[5], resulting in unstable, vulnerable households and long-term developmental challenges.
These figures are a wake-up call, but in challenge lies scope for innovation. I believe we can – and must – turn the burden into opportunity.
Closing the gap through health-tech partnerships
Every woman diagnosed and treated early is not only more likely to survive but also able to remain active in her family and community[6], contributing to shared prosperity.
Through healthcare and technology partnerships, we can leapfrog traditional healthcare models and turn the tide towards survival.
Excitingly, this process has already started. Governments are increasingly setting strategies and allocating funding for digital health. Start-ups and companies are driving the uptake of digital health tools that could revolutionise care delivery.
Artificial intelligence stands out as the breakthrough technology. Pharmaceutical and biotech companies such as Roche are already using AI throughout their value chains, both in the early stage of drug development and also to correctly interpret the enormous amounts of data generated to deliver effective health solutions.
In most sub-Saharan countries, more than 20% of the population lives more than two hours from essential health services.[7] Tech’s role in Africa’s future is about much more than connectivity or commerce. It’s about lives and well-being – AI, apps, telemedicine and other digital solutions can close the gap to bring care closer to people.
But without individuals and organisations working together, innovation can’t come to life.
And since the journey for a patient experiencing a health crisis such as breast cancer involves many stakeholders, we must urgently identify opportunities for partners to come together and spur real action.
This week, Roche sponsored the 28th annual Africa Tech Festival’s first-ever health track. Policymakers, innovators, professionals and experts met to thrash out actionable solutions to the continent’s biggest health challenges.
This was part of an ambitious broader strategy to transform healthcare in Africa – investment in early intervention strategies can generate returns that far outstrip their cost.
Research by McKinsey & Company shows that the African digital health space is already seeing unprecedented growth, with $123-million in investment secured by 55 start-ups in 2021.[8]
The consultancy’s analysis showed that digital health tools – such as virtual platforms for consultations; electronic health records; mobile apps to help patients self-manage their diseases; and patient e-booking platforms – could help South Africa, Kenya and Nigeria capture efficiencies of up to 15% in total healthcare expenditure by 2030.[9]
Widespread adoption could free up an astounding $1.9-billion to $11-billion in South Africa alone.[10]
Speaking with one voice for a better future
Innovation has been the backbone of progress across any major public health disease – whether it’s HIV, cancer or ophthalmology. It takes a combination of passionate people and expert innovation to make a difference.
One existing solution and real-life example of African innovation and partnership is EMPOWER, a groundbreaking digital health platform developed to improve coordinated breast and cervical cancer care in Kenya.[11]
The initiative has grown from a single clinic in 2019 to a 76-site national platform and is integrated into Kenya’s National Cancer Registry.[12]
Empower ensures that the entire patient journey, from screening to treatment and follow-up, is digitally powered.
The current average five-year survival rate for breast cancer across Africa is roughly five out of 10 patients that are diagnosed (48%).[13] My vision is that this will increase to 80% within the next 5 years.
Realising this audacious goal will take commitment from stakeholders to drive action for the tens of thousands of African women who desperately need it.
There is no reason why someone in a Western society should have a better health outcome than here in Africa. The health of our people is the wealth of our nations. We must speak with one voice and act now.
––––––––––
Thom Renwick is general manager of Roche South Africa and the sub-region. He began his journey with the company in 2012 on its United Kingdom graduate programme, following his studies at King’s College London, Cranfield School of Management and the University of Oxford.
During his career at Roche, he has worked in global product strategy in Basel, Switzerland, as head of ophthalmology in the UK and as chief of staff for Pharma International. He won the PharmaTimes New Marketer of the Year Award in 2015 and was featured in the publication’s Smart People series in 2021.
[2] WifOR Institute, ‘The Value of Investing in Innovative Medicines: Socioeconomic Burden of HER2+ Breast Cancer and Annual Social Impact of Roche’s Treatments for the Disease in Africa’. Accessed: Nov. 7, 2025 [Online]. Available: https://africa.roche.com/stories/what-s-it-worth-the-value-of-innovation
[3] WifOR Institute, ‘The Value of Investing in Innovative Medicines: Socioeconomic Burden of HER2+ Breast Cancer and Annual Social Impact of Roche’s Treatments for the Disease in Africa’. Accessed: Nov. 7, 2025 [Online]. Available: https://africa.roche.com/stories/what-s-it-worth-the-value-of-innovation
[4] WifOR Institute, ‘The Value of Investing in Innovative Medicines: Socioeconomic Burden of HER2+ Breast Cancer and Annual Social Impact of Roche’s Treatments for the Disease in Africa’. Accessed: Nov. 7, 2025 [Online]. Available: https://africa.roche.com/stories/what-s-it-worth-the-value-of-innovation
[5] WifOR Institute, ‘The Value of Investing in Innovative Medicines: Socioeconomic Burden of HER2+ Breast Cancer and Annual Social Impact of Roche’s Treatments for the Disease in Africa’. Accessed: Nov. 7, 2025 [Online]. Available: https://africa.roche.com/stories/what-s-it-worth-the-value-of-innovation
[6] WifOR Institute, ‘The Value of Investing in Innovative Medicines: Socioeconomic Burden of HER2+ Breast Cancer and Annual Social Impact of Roche’s Treatments for the Disease in Africa’. Accessed: Nov. 7, 2025 [Online]. Available: https://africa.roche.com/stories/what-s-it-worth-the-value-of-innovation
[7] Mckinsey, ‘How digital tools could boost efficiency in African health systems.’ Accessed: Nov. 7, 2025 [Online]. Available: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/healthcare/our-insights/how-digital-tools-could-boost-efficiency-in-african-health-systems
[8] Mckinsey, ‘How digital tools could boost efficiency in African health systems.’ Accessed: Nov. 7, 2025 [Online]. Available: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/healthcare/our-insights/how-digital-tools-could-boost-efficiency-in-african-health-systems
[9] Mckinsey, ‘How digital tools could boost efficiency in African health systems’. Accessed: Nov. 7, 2025 [Online]. Available: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/healthcare/our-insights/how-digital-tools-could-boost-efficiency-in-african-health-systems
[10] Mckinsey, ‘How digital tools could boost efficiency in African health systems’. Accessed: Nov. 7, 2025 [Online]. Available: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/healthcare/our-insights/how-digital-tools-could-boost-efficiency-in-african-health-systems
[11] Roche Africa, ‘From vision to national platform: EMPOWER scales through Kenya’s National Cancer Institute’. Accessed: Nov. 7, 2025 [Online]. Available: https://africa.roche.com/stories/empower-scales-through-kenya-national-cancer-institute
[12] Roche Africa, ‘From vision to national platform: EMPOWER scales through Kenya’s National Cancer Institute’. Accessed: Nov. 7, 2025 [Online]. Available: https://africa.roche.com/stories/empower-scales-through-kenya-national-cancer-institute
[13] A. Padu-Pebrah, et al., ‘Five-Year Survival Outcomes for Breast Cancer Patients Across Continental Africa: A Contemporary Review of Literature with Meta Analysis’, eLife. Accessed: Nov. 7, 2025 [Online]. Available: https://elifesciences.org/reviewed-preprints/105488#mainMenu
Investigators trained multiple artificial intelligence models to read images from echocardiograms, a type of ultrasound test that evaluates the structure and function of the heart. Their goal was to determine whether AI could use these images to calculate measurements like inflammation and scarring that are normally obtained through another, more costly test called cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI). By examining findings from 1453 patients who had undergone both tests, they found the AI models could not accomplish this task.
“As compared to echocardiograms, cardiac MRI machines are expensive and not available for many patients, especially those in rural areas, so we had hoped that AI could reduce the need for it,” said Alan Kwan, MD, assistant professor in the Department of Cardiology in the Smidt Heart Institute at Cedars-Sinai and co-senior author of the study. “Our results showed the limited powers of AI in this area.”
Health data is one of the most valuable assets in modern healthcare, and the Protection of Personal Information Act, 2013 (POPIA) places strict requirements on its use.
Stakeholders in the healthcare sector understand the value of data in ensuring appropriate treatment for patients. With the proliferation of technologies such as artificial intelligence, which enable healthcare practitioners to derive valuable insights from the data they hold, the importance of managing data in a manner that ensures compliance with data protection laws must remain front of mind in all data processing activities.
This obligation is particularly acute given the volumes of data that evolving technologies allow healthcare institutions to collect and utilise. Importantly, when these larger datasets include special personal information, the obligation to process such information lawfully becomes even more significant. This is because POPIA regulates the processing of special personal information (which includes health and sex life information) more closely than it does other forms of personal information.
The implications of POPIA’s strict regulation of processing health and sex life information means that, where a responsible party is considering collecting such data, an assessment must be made before collection to ensure that the intended processing activities will be lawful under POPIA. Conducting such an assessment prior to collection is integral to establishing a lawful basis for processing from the outset, as all handling of health and sex life information must remain lawful throughout the processing lifecycle, from collection and use to deletion and destruction.
POPIA establishes, as a starting point, a prohibition on processing health and sex life information unless a justification exists. One general exception is where the data subject has granted consent for such processing. It is important to note that consent is specifically defined under POPIA as an informed, voluntary expression of will. Importantly, consent must be specific and cannot be overly generalised. Any reliance on consent must therefore meet these definitional requirements. Ensuring compliance with these requirements is increasingly pertinent where data is used for purposes that differ from the reason for which it was initially collected.
POPIA provides additional exemptions for processing special personal information. For health information, POPIA permits processing by medical professionals, healthcare institutions or facilities, or social services, where such role players are providing healthcare services. POPIA also provides an exemption that applies to insurance companies, medical schemes, medical scheme administrators, and managed healthcare organisations in certain circumstances.
While POPIA creates these categories of exemptions, it is important to note that even where a role player falls within an exemption, this does not eliminate the obligation on a responsible party to comply with POPIA’s eight conditions for lawful processing. Any responsible party relying on an exemption must still ensure that processing activities are ultimately lawful and consistent with the standards of care contemplated under POPIA.
The use of automated means to make decisions about data subjects using their health and sex life information must also be carried out lawfully and in compliance with POPIA. A data subject cannot be subject to a decision that has legal consequences for them, or that otherwise affects them to a substantial degree, where such a decision is based solely on automated decision-making using their personal information, except in limited instances.
Notably, POPIA specifically identifies health as an example of a decision that could have legal consequences or otherwise affect a data subject substantially. This highlights the importance of assessing all data processing activities, especially in sectors like healthcare, where there is growing reliance on technology to make diagnostic or treatment-related decisions.
The Information Regulator has recognised the importance of properly regulating the processing of health and sex life information in recently published Draft Regulations relating to the processing of such data by certain responsible parties. The Information Regulator notes that the primary purpose of these Draft Regulations is to assist responsible parties in implementing POPIA correctly and to provide better transparency to data subjects regarding their information.
The scope of application of the Draft Regulations includes insurance companies, medical schemes, medical scheme administrators, managed healthcare organisations and pension funds.
The Information Regulator’s move to regulate the processing of health and sex life information more closely underscores the importance of ensuring that all such processing activities are undertaken with an increased measure of care. Organisations must therefore assess their processing activities routinely to ensure ongoing compliance with POPIA. This is particularly important as healthcare-related technologies continue to advance, creating new and innovative ways to use data in patient treatment.
Healthcare stakeholders must ensure that use of such technologies comply with POPIA’s requirements and meet the standards established under the Act.
Doctors who use artificial intelligence at work risk having their colleagues deem them less competent for it, according to a recent Johns Hopkins University study.
While generative AI holds significant promise for advancing health care, a new study finds its use in medical decision-making impacts how physicians are perceived by their colleagues. The research shows that doctors who primarily rely on generative AI for decision-making face considerable scepticism from fellow clinicians, who correlate their use of AI with a lack of clinical skill and overall competence, resulting in a diminished perceived quality of patient care.
The research included a diverse group of clinicians from a major hospital system, involving attending physicians, residents, fellows, and advanced practice providers. Results of the study were published in Nature Digital Medicine.
Stigma stunts better care
The findings may indicate a social barrier to AI adoption in health care settings, which could slow advances that might improve patient care.
“AI is already unmistakably part of medicine,” says Tinglong Dai, professor of business at the Johns Hopkins Carey Business School and co-corresponding author of the study. “What surprised us is that doctors who use it in making medical decisions can be perceived by their peers as less capable. That kind of stigma, not the technology itself, may be an obstacle to better care.”
The study, conducted by researchers at Johns Hopkins University, involved a randomised experiment where 276 practicing clinicians evaluated different scenarios: a physician using no AI, one using AI as a primary decision-making tool, and another using it for verification. The research found that as physicians were more dependent on AI, they faced an increasing “competence penalty,” meaning they were viewed more sceptically by their peers than those physicians who did not rely on AI.
“In the age of AI, human psychology remains the ultimate variable,” says Haiyang Yang, first author of the study and academic program director of the Masters of Science in Management program at the Carey Business School. “The way people perceive AI use can matter just as much as, or even more than, the performance of the technology itself.”
Skipping AI equalled more respect
According to the study, peer perception suffers for doctors who rely on AI. Framing generative AI as a “second opinion” or a verification tool partially improved negative perceptions from peers, but it did not fully eliminate them. Not using GenAI, however, resulted in the most favourable peer perceptions.
The findings align with theories that suggest perceived dependence on an external source like AI can be seen as a weakness by clinicians.
Ironically, while GenAI’s visible use can undermine a physician’s perceived clinical expertise among peers, the study also found that clinicians still recognise AI as a beneficial tool for enhancing precision in clinical assessment. The research showed that clinicians still generally acknowledge the value of GenAI for improving the accuracy of clinical assessments, and they view institutionally customized GenAI as even more useful.
The collaborative nature of the study led to thoughtful suggestions for GenAI implementation in health care settings, which are crucial to balance innovation with maintaining professional trust and physician reputation, the researchers note.
“Physicians place a high value on clinical expertise, and as AI becomes part of the future of medicine, it’s important to recognise its potential to complement – not replace – clinical judgment, ultimately strengthening decision making and improving patient care,” said Risa Wolf, co-corresponding author of the research and associate professor of pediatric endocrinology at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine with a joint appointment at the Carey Business School.
ThriveLink to connect patients, doctors, caregivers, and medical schemes in a seamless digital platform
The last thing someone dealing with a life-threatening disease wants is the pain of endless administrative paperwork and confusion that arises when aspects of their care are not easily coordinated. Altron HealthTech is set to pilot a solution designed to minimise these burdens by integrating various aspects of care management into one solution.
The company announced today that it will soon begin piloting ThriveLink, South Africa’s first platform to connect patients, doctors, caregivers, and medical schemes in one integrated digital space. The oncology companion app is designed to help cancer patients flourish during a trying time by providing seamless care coordination, access to key information and educational content and removal of administrative obstacles.
“We’ve built this tool with the ultimate goal of making life easier for cancer patients to be empowered throughout managing their treatment journey,” says Altron HealthTech MD Leslie Moodley. “They’ll receive appointment tracking, medication reminders, and secure communication with their care team – all customised for their unique treatment plan in one digital space – so they can focus on what matters most: their health and wellbeing.”
Addressing a growing crisis
The development team was inspired to create ThriveLink after frontline agents logged an alarming increase in cancer diagnoses. Cancer cases in South Africa are projected to nearly double from 62 000 in 2019 to 121 000 nationally by 2030 based on data compiled by the SA Journal of Oncology, driven by an aging population and increased lifestyle risks.
“We have insight into anonymised and aggregated data, and were shocked at the increase in cancer volumes,” says Moodley. “We realised there was value in developing a tool that could span the entire healthcare value chain and all the various touchpoints, to solve for a very real issue. This insight sparked a critical question: how can we make it easier for oncologists, our key stakeholders, to focus on what matters most – patient care?
ThriveLink brings together data from specialists, medical aids, pharmacies, and other relevant sources to coordinate care to connect healthcare providers. Beyond appointment tracking and medication reminders, the app offers educational content, emotional support tools, and secure communication channels.
“The solution enables these data points to collaborate in a technical sense to coordinate care,” explains Moodley. “Our response was to build a technology-driven platform that not only streamlines authorisations and treatment protocols but also enables real-time interoperability. This empowers oncologists to coordinate care more efficiently, track treatment pathways, and adapt plans based on patient-specific outcomes. Patients won’t have to worry about burdensome details and will get reminded when it’s time to take their medication or schedule a follow-up.”
Built on medical expertise and security
The app serves as the vital link in a complex ecosystem, ensuring secure information flow, informed decision-making, and trust at every stage.
Altron HealthTech consulted widely with oncologists, patients, and other medical professionals before beginning development. A base application was rolled out to specialists about a year ago, and feedback from that pilot informed the expanded platform now ready for patient testing.
The app has been built on secure, cloud-based software-as-a-service architecture in compliance with the Protection of Personal Information Act and all relevant regulatory requirements. Patients must provide informed consent before signing up.
Beyond supporting patients directly, ThriveLink is designed to help control healthcare costs. Cancer is among the most expensive therapeutic burdens, with the Cancer Alliance having predicted that this disease will cost the public sector an additional R50 billion between 2020 and 2030.
“By streamlining processes and integrating claims, authorisations, and clinical data, we remove duplication and costs from the system,” says Moodley. “This can indirectly help keep medical aid premiums down, benefiting all medical scheme patients.”
Altron HealthTech is in early-stage discussions with medical aid schemes interested in integrating the app into their mobile solutions.
Women who receive more virtual antenatal care during their second or third trimesters could experience poorer pregnancy outcomes, including higher risks of preterm birth, Caesarean sections and neonatal intensive care unit admissions, a new study suggests.
Increased virtual antenatal care in later pregnancy was also found to be associated with lower rates of early skin-to-skin contact with the newborn and fewer instances of breastfeeding as the first feed.
Led by King’s College London and published in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, the study looked at associations between virtual antenatal care and pregnancy outcomes in more than 34 000 pregnancies from a diverse, South London population, from periods before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Women were split into four groups, according to the proportion of virtual antenatal care appointments received during their pregnancy – low and stable virtual antenatal care throughout pregnancy, high first trimester virtual antenatal care, high second trimester virtual antenatal care, and high third trimester virtual antenatal care.
Pregnancy and birth outcome data were obtained from hospital records via the Early Life Cross-Linkage in Research, Born in South London (eLIXIR-BiSL) platform, funded by the UKRI Medical Research Council (MRC).
Analyses of the data revealed that, compared with those who received a low and stable proportion of virtual antenatal care throughout their pregnancy:
Women who received a high proportion of virtual antenatal care in their second trimester experienced more premature births (before 37 weeks), labour inductions, breech presentation, and bleeding after birth; and
Women who received a high proportion of virtual antenatal care in their third trimester had more premature births (before 37 weeks), elective or emergency Caesarean sections, and neonatal intensive care unit admissions; as well as lower rates of third- or fourth-degree vaginal tears, early skin-to-skin contact with the newborn and fewer instances of breastfeeding as the first feed.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of virtual antenatal care increased, to limit face-to-face contact and prevent spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. While research has looked at the experiences of women and healthcare providers receiving and delivering virtual care, fewer studies have focused on the impact of virtual antenatal care on pregnancy outcomes.
Our work adds an important perspective to the growing evidence base on virtual antenatal care, suggesting that the timing of its use during pregnancy may influence pregnancy outcomes.
Dr Katie Dalrymple, Lecturer at King’s and first author of the study
The findings build on an earlier study by the team, which found that virtual maternity care during the COVID-19 pandemic was linked to higher NHS costs – with each 1% increase in virtual antenatal care associated with a £7 increase in maternity costs to the NHS.
In addition to the cost implications of virtual care, the findings from the new study suggest that virtual antenatal care could come with increased risks to mother and baby. The authors conclude that careful consideration may be needed to minimise these risks before using virtual antenatal care in future health system shocks or to replace face-to-face care.
Our study findings suggest the need for careful integration of virtual care in maternity services, to minimise potential risks.
Professor Laura Magee, Professor of Women’s Health at King’s and co-senior author of the paper
