ArticleHealthcare informatics research2026
Legal Barriers to Implementing AI-Enabled Emergency Medical Services in Korea: Focus on the Medical Service Act, Emergency Medical Service Act, and Personal Information Protection Act.
Article in Healthcare informatics research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesIn prehospital and in-hospital emergency care, artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled emergency medical services (EMS) systems are reshaping clinical workflows through real-time triage, automated hospital assignment, telemedicine, and biometric monitoring. However, their implementation in Korea has revealed substantial legal and regulatory barriers. This study analyzed the structural incompatibilities between AI-enabled EMS and Korea's current legal framework, with particular attention to the Medical Service Act, Emergency Medical Service Act, and Personal Information Protection Act.
methodsWe conducted a statutory review and case analysis of pilot projects, including the Chungbuk Smart EMS Project, the AI HOTline in Ilsan, and Yonsei's AI-Ambulance model. We also performed a comparative assessment of foreign regulatory frameworks, including the US Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and the EU General Data Protection Regulation.
resultsKey barriers included the restriction of remote care to interphysician communication under Article 34 of the Medical Service Act, the lack of legal mandates for real-time hospital capacity sharing under the Emergency Medical Service Act, and limits on real-time sensitive-data processing caused by vague emergency clauses in the Personal Information Protection Act. These barriers constrain the scalability of AI-enabled EMS in Korea.
conclusionsTo support lawful and secure integration of AI-driven emergency care in Korea, we propose legislative revisions that establish emergency exceptions for remote AI-supported guidance, require hospital resource disclosure, and provide safe-harbor protections for healthcare professionals who rely on certified AI tools. A harmonized legal infrastructure is essential for realizing the potential of digital transformation in emergency care.
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.