ArticleBulletin of the World Health Organization2026
Governance of artificial intelligence for health systems, WHO European Region.
Article in Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Applications of Artificial Intelligence Technologies in Nursing for Noncommunicable Chronic Diseases: A Scoping Review.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery as Patient Safety Strategies for Perioperative Care in Resource-Limited Settings.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To provide an overview of the status of artificial intelligence (AI) governance for health in the World Health Organization (WHO) European Region. Methods: The WHO Regional Office for Europe developed a cross-sectional survey on AI governance and adoption. The survey was available to all 53 Member States between June 2024 and March 2025. Responses were analysed at the regional and subregional level. Findings: Of the 50 Member States responding to the survey, 8% (4/50) have a health-specific AI strategy and 14% (7) are developing one. Regionally, 33 Member States have implemented cross-sectoral AI strategies and 8 (16%) are developing them. Of these Member States, almost half each have assigned implementation and oversight responsibilities to existing single or multiple government agencies. Nearly half the Member States (23) reported ongoing assessments of laws and policies on AI systems and a fifth (10) have developed new health-specific AI laws. Only 14 Member States have issued guidelines to address the ethical implications of using AI in health or across sectors. Less than 10% (4) of Member States have developed liability standards for AI or guidance on the application of existing liability standards. Overall, 33 (66%) Member States have adopted health data strategies, 33 (66%) have health data hubs and (68%) have health data authorities supporting data access and control. Conclusion: In the WHO European Region, governance of AI in health care is underdeveloped. Adaptive legal and policy mechanisms are needed to respond effectively to the complex and evolving challenges of AI integration in health systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.