Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Framework supports organizations in evaluating AI applications, ensuring ethical and effective healthcare practices.
Artificial intelligence (AI) offers opportunities to improve healthcare, but it also raises important questions. How do we ensure that AI remains clinically relevant, is organisationally feasible, is applied correctly in legal terms and remains ethically responsible? The interdisciplinary team of UGent Delta developed a framework to support healthcare organisations in the responsible assessment and implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in line with their vision on good healthcare. This framework builds on existing quality principles in care from the Quintuple Aim model. It helps care organisations to discuss and evaluate AI applications and to make well-founded choices. The framework is not a tick-box exercise, but a tool for reflection and dialogue. The document is a work in progress and can be adapted on the basis of new insights and practical experience. The framework consists of two complementary components: (1) a general assessment framework addressing overarching considerations for AI adoption in healthcare, and (2) a specific assessment framework designed for evaluating individual AI applications in a concrete organisational context. This repository contains the Dutch and English versions of the framework .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Biesen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: