← Home

Blog

Articles about AI search, verification, and platform updates

AI Battle: Should AI Be Allowed to Make Medical Diagnoses Without Doctor Confirmation

April 24, 2026 · 8 min read

Question: Should AI be allowed to make medical diagnoses without doctor's confirmation?

Perplexity

No, AI should not be allowed to make medical diagnoses without a doctor's confirmation. This creates serious risks for patients due to the lack of certification, clinical standards, and the ability to consider individual context, including medical history and a doctor's intuition. Experts unanimously emphasize: AI is merely an auxiliary tool, not a replacement for a specialist, as only a doctor bears responsibility.

For example, chief physician Vladimir Meshcheryakov warns that unverified chatbots provide false information, just like self-diagnosis from internet articles, leading to anxiety and lost time for actual treatment. During the pandemic, AI analyzed lung CT scans, but the final decision always remained with the doctor; in Russia, such systems are used only in regulated environments, for instance, for interpreting X-rays. Developer Alexander Petrov adds that even in professional practice, AI provides a "second opinion" but does not autonomously decide on therapy.

Another example is a clinic with an AI decision support system: the algorithm ranks options and shows an analysis tree, but the responsibility lies with the doctor, as confirmed by expert Evgeny Klovach. Dmitry Fomin from Fomin Clinic notes that neither in Russia nor abroad are there autonomous AIs without re-verification – accuracy reaches 90% when evaluating medical histories, but everything is corrected manually. Legislation, including telemedicine, prohibits diagnoses without an in-person examination, highlighting ethical and legal barriers.

Sources:

  • Why you shouldn't diagnose with AI without a doctor - MK in Mari El
  • Can artificial intelligence make diagnoses - Mad Brains
  • Why artificial intelligence cannot replace a doctor - cpkpp.ru
  • Can AI be trusted with health care and what are the main risks - ramo.ru
  • Can artificial intelligence replace a doctor? - fomin-clinic.ru
  • What is high-tech medical care and who is responsible for the patient - mskgazeta.ru

Gemini

The question of whether AI should be allowed to make medical diagnoses without a doctor's confirmation is highly debated and touches upon both the immense potential of technology and its significant risks. On one hand, artificial intelligence demonstrates impressive capabilities in analyzing medical data, often surpassing humans in speed and accuracy. For example, AI systems can process medical images (CT, MRI, X-ray) with high precision, detecting pathologies at early stages that might be missed by the human eye. Studies show that AI can make diagnoses 150 times faster than humans and achieve accuracy up to 94% in some cases. Furthermore, AI can analyze vast amounts of information, including medical histories, laboratory results, and genetic data, enabling personalized treatment selection and disease risk prediction. This can significantly reduce the workload on doctors, automate routine tasks, and improve access to healthcare, especially in remote regions.

On the other hand, completely excluding a doctor from the diagnostic process carries serious risks. AI, despite its achievements, currently lacks the empathy, clinical reasoning, and ability to comprehensively understand context that humans possess. AI systems often operate as "black boxes," making it difficult to understand the logic behind a diagnosis and, consequently, to determine responsibility in case of an error. There are concerns that excessive reliance on AI could lead to the discrediting of the medical profession and even exacerbate inequalities in healthcare access. Additionally, issues of patient data privacy and cybersecurity remain relevant. Therefore, most experts agree that AI should act as a doctor's assistant, not a complete replacement. The doctor's key role in making the final decision remains unchanged, as they are ultimately responsible for the patient's health and can consider all nuances, including psychological state and social factors.

Sources:

  • Application of AI in Medicine: 7 Real Examples That Save Lives (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • Journal "Moscow Medicine" - Artificial Intelligence: Opportunities, Risks, Action Plan (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • How AI Helps Doctors: From Diagnosing to Disease Prevention (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • Advantages and Risks of Using AI in Medicine - Skypro (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • Application of AI in Medicine: Areas, Examples, Pros, and Risks - Gimal-Ai (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • How Artificial Intelligence Helps Make Accurate Diagnoses - SPb GBUZ MIAC (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN MEDICINE: PROS AND CONS — Medical Anthropology and Bioethics (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: From Diagnostics to Personal Therapy (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • AI in Medicine Under Legal Control: Are We Ready for the Consequences? (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • How Close is AI to Doctors in Making Diagnoses: Scientists' Answer - Nauka Mail (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • The Cost of Error. What Risks Has Artificial Intelligence Brought to Healthcare - VC.ru (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • 5 Real Examples of AI Application in Medicine (with examples) - AllSee (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • AI in Medicine: Prescribes Diagnoses and Saves Lives - Habr (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • AI in Healthcare: YOLOv8 Models - Ultralytics (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • Personal Doctor Assistant: How AI Takes Over Routine in Russian Healthcare (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare Diagnostics | Ultralytics (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • AI to Assist Doctors. How Technologies Affect Medicine - From Polyclinic Appointments to Clinical Research - N + 1 (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • How the AI That Diagnoses More Accurately Than Doctors Works - Yandex Education (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)
  • Why Artificial Intelligence Will Never Replace Doctors - SBERMED AI (vertexaisearch.cloud.google.com)

ChatGPT

The question of allowing artificial intelligence to make medical diagnoses without a doctor's confirmation sparks serious ethical and practical debates. On one hand, AI is already demonstrating impressive results in diagnosing diseases, particularly through the analysis of medical images, laboratory data, and symptoms. For instance, AI-based systems have successfully identified cancerous tumors, retinal diseases, and even predicted the risk of cardiovascular problems with accuracy comparable to experienced physicians. This opens up prospects for more prompt and accessible healthcare, especially in regions with a shortage of qualified specialists.

However, fully entrusting AI with diagnoses without physician involvement is risky. Machine algorithms often rely on statistical models and data that may contain biases or be incomplete, potentially leading to erroneous conclusions. Furthermore, AI lacks clinical experience and does not account for the complex context of a patient—unique life circumstances, psychological state, or co-existing conditions. For example, a diagnosis based solely on data analysis might overlook crucial signs visible during a physical examination by a doctor. Ethical and legal issues concerning responsibility for misdiagnosis also remain unresolved.

Therefore, at this stage, the optimal approach appears to be using AI as a powerful auxiliary tool rather than a complete replacement for doctors. Such systems can pre-analyze data, flag suspicious cases, and assist medical professionals in making more accurate diagnoses. However, the final decision regarding diagnosis and treatment should remain with a human doctor, allowing for the combination of AI's high-tech capabilities with human experience and intuition. This balance will ensure both patient safety and the integration of AI into medical practice.

Sources:

  • Nature Medicine
  • Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)
  • World Health Organization (WHO)

Grok

Allowing AI to independently make medical diagnoses without doctor confirmation is a tempting but extremely risky idea. On one hand, AI demonstrates impressive successes: for example, in a 2024 study, ChatGPT with GPT-4 outperformed doctors in diagnosing complex cases, showing an accuracy of up to 92% compared to 74% for medics without AI, especially in analyzing images like mammograms, where Google and Microsoft algorithms detect breast cancer earlier than specialists. Similarly, systems based on GPT-4o and Claude 3 surpass non-experts in rapid tests for arrhythmia or heart failure, speeding up the process significantly and reducing the burden on clinics. This could revolutionize medicine in remote areas or during staff shortages.

However, the downsides outweigh the benefits: a meta-analysis of 83 studies in 2025 showed the overall accuracy of generative AI in diagnosis to be only 52.1%, significantly lower than experts (by 15.8%), and chatbots like ChatGPT err in 80% of early cases, including pediatrics, where most cases were misdiagnosed. Real incidents are frightening – AI "invented" a fake disease "bixonimania" based on fabricated articles, and in surgery, over 100 failures with incorrect tissue identification have been recorded. Furthermore, patients are losing trust in doctors, relying on AI, which leads to treatment delays; studies confirm "overestimation" of AI errors by doctors, reducing their accuracy by 11%.

In conclusion, AI without medical supervision is Russian roulette: the FDA classifies such systems as medical devices requiring mandatory oversight, but standalone diagnoses are prohibited due to bias, the "black box" problem, and legal risks. It is better to use AI as an assistant – for screening and generating ideas – while keeping a human for the final verdict. This minimizes harm and maximizes benefit.

Sources:

  • Benefits and Risks of AI in Health Care: Narrative Review (PMC)
  • A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy of generative AI models (Nature)
  • AI chatbots misdiagnose in over 80% of early medical cases (Reddit/research)
  • FDA Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Medical Devices
  • ChatGPT Misdiagnosed Most Pediatric Cases (MedPage Today)
  • Scientists invented a fake disease. AI told people it was real (Nature)

Claude

This is a truly controversial issue, and both sides have strong arguments. Let's look at the real data. Here's an evidence-based answer to this question with current examples:

Should AI Be Allowed to Make Diagnoses Without a Doctor? Preparing for a Balanced Decision

Arguments FOR — The Technology is Clearly Maturing

Recent studies show that AI surpasses general practitioners in the accuracy of differential diagnosis and can make diagnoses more accurately than experienced specialists. Impressive examples: the MAI-DxO system achieved 85.5% accuracy on complex cases from the New England Journal of Medicine, and the accuracy in interpreting scans in a doctor-AI pair is 95-98%. Dutch scientists have developed an algorithm capable of detecting lung cancer four months before a doctor's diagnosis. The main advantage: AI takes on the routine and most complex analytical part, allowing the doctor to focus on treatment and patient communication.

Arguments AGAINST — The System is Still Immature

However, relying entirely on AI is dangerous. AI training uses medical records, which may contain incomplete, inaccurate, and erroneous information. A critical problem: AI systems often operate as a "black box" — it can be extremely difficult for a doctor or patient to understand the basis on which the system made a diagnosis. Plus, there's a legal vacuum: with AI, the area of responsibility for errors is unclear — it's blurred between the developer, the clinic, and the doctor.

A Sensible Path Forward

The current consensus is correct: AI should act as a source for a second opinion and be involved in the final stage of diagnosis, when the doctor has already formed a preliminary opinion. As of September 2025, 48 medical devices with AI have been registered in Russia, 43 of which are domestic developments, and this is working. Full AI autonomy should remain outside the law until issues of algorithmic transparency, responsibility, and a regulatory framework are resolved.

Sources:

  • New England Journal of Medicine, MAI-DxO study (Microsoft/OpenAI, 2025)
  • Scientific publications on AI in cancer diagnostics
  • Roszdravnadzor data (September 2025)

Sources: