The federal health department has raised concerns about the use of AI scribes by doctors as the health regulator considers the need for safeguards around the technology.
AI scribe tools record, transcribe and summarise conversations between doctors and patients for medical notes, and have boomed in popularity in the past 18 months.
According to an online poll by the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP), use of AI scribes by doctors in Australia nearly doubled from 22% in August 2024 to 40% in November 2025.
Companies offering the technology to practitioners say it has been used hundreds of millions of times across the globe in the past 18 months alone as doctors seek to ease the administrative burden of patient consultations.
The federal health department has identified concerns about the growing use of the technology. In February 2026 Senate estimates briefing documents, obtained by Guardian Australia under freedom of information laws, the department noted AI scribes “have little oversight” and raised concerns about the use of such tools in healthcare settings.
Digital scribes are classified as “medical devices” – and therefore regulated by the Therapeutic Goods Act – only if they serve a therapeutic purpose.
“Anecdotally, some are marketed as outside regulatory levers (e.g., not a medical device) or as privacy‑compliant, often with limited transparency,” the department said. “Some suppliers may be unaware their cloud platforms send data outside Australia, raising risks for patient data security.”
The department said some suppliers advertised a 30% revenue increase for health professionals with no additional hours or patient consultations, “which has implications for [Medicare Benefits Scheme] costs”.
In an April briefing document from the department’s AI advisory group, it was noted that AI scribes could improve clinicians’ productivity and potentially reduce their burnout, but were subject to the same limitations as other large language models in terms of quality and accuracy.
“This has implications for patient safety, clinical accountability, and the integrity of data held within national digital health infrastructure.”
The department also noted there was a significant variation in how clinicians and practices obtained consent from patients for the use of the scribes.
“Our position is that informed consent requires consumers to understand the benefits and limitations of the technology to which they are consenting.”
Dr Elizabeth Deveny, the chief executive of the Consumer Health Forum, said the documents showed consumers and the government were raising the same questions about the technology.
“It is good that the department has identified these as key issues. The next question is really whether the current safeguards are strong enough and consistent enough in day-to-day practice,” she said.
Source link
Disclaimer
We strive to uphold the highest ethical standards in all of our reporting and coverage. We blogs.grocliq.com want to be transparent with our readers about any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in our work. It’s possible that some of the investors we feature may have connections to other businesses, including competitors or companies we write about. However, we want to assure our readers that this will not have any impact on the integrity or impartiality of our reporting. We are committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news and information to our audience, and we will continue to uphold our ethics and principles in all of our work. Thank you for your trust and support.
Website Upgradation is going on for any glitch kindly connect at [email protected]
