Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare Institutions: Opportunities, Risks, and Challenges for Social Security
Keywords:
Institutional innovation, Patient safety, Data governance, Machine learning, Digital health, Health systems, Social security, Artificial intelligenceAbstract
Introduction: Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming healthcare systems and social security institutions through applications ranging from administrative automation to clinical decision support and predictive analytics. However, its implementation requires robust governance frameworks to ensure safety, equity, and transparency.
Objective: To review current evidence on the use of artificial intelligence in healthcare institutions, with emphasis on social security systems, highlighting opportunities, risks, challenges, and requirements for responsible implementation.
Methods: A narrative review was conducted using technical reports, institutional documents, and scientific literature on AI in healthcare and social security. Sources included publications from the International Social Security Association (ISSA), the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the World Health Organization (WHO), the 2025 Latin American Artificial Intelligence Index (ILIA), and representative clinical studies on AI applications. The evidence was organized into six thematic domains: institutional applications, clinical use cases, organizational innovation, governance and regulation, cybersecurity, and implementation requirements.
Results: AI has demonstrated potential to improve patient services through intelligent chatbots, optimize administrative management, strengthen auditing and fraud detection, support clinical diagnosis, screening, rehabilitation, and public health surveillance. Nevertheless, successful implementation depends on data quality, local validation, workflow integration, human oversight, data governance, interoperability, and continuous performance evaluation. Frameworks such as AI-GUARD provide structured approaches for risk-based governance before deployment.
Conclusions: Artificial intelligence offers a strategic opportunity to strengthen healthcare and social security institutions when implemented under principles of transparency, equity, data protection, human oversight, and continuous evaluation. In Latin America, expanding institutional capacity, digital infrastructure, and governance mechanisms will be essential for responsible and sustainable AI adoption.
Downloads
References
1. International Social Security Association; United Nations University Operating Unit on Policy-Driven Electronic Governance. Artificial intelligence in social security organizations. Geneva: International Social Security Association; 2024.
2. Asociación Internacional de la Seguridad Social. Inteligencia artificial en la seguridad social: antecedentes y experiencias [Internet]. Ginebra: AISS; 2020 [citado 2026 Jun 13]. Disponible en: https://www.issa.int/es/analysis/artificial-intelligence-social-security-background-and-experiences
3. Asociación Internacional de la Seguridad Social. La inteligencia artificial en las instituciones de seguridad social: el caso de los chatbots inteligentes [Internet]. Ginebra: AISS; 2022 [citado 2026 Jun 13]. Disponible en: https://www.issa.int/es/analysis/artificial-intelligence-social-securityinstitutions-case-intelligent-chatbots
4. Park J, Brunois T. Uso de la inteligencia artificial y la big data en la rehabilitación en el marco de la seguridad social. Ginebra: Asociación Internacional de la Seguridad Social; 2025.
5. Asociación Internacional de la Seguridad Social. Desarrollos y tendencias en la seguridad social: Américas 2026. Ginebra: AISS; 2026.
6. Soto Á, Durán R, Moreno A, Adasme S, Rovira S, Jordán V, et al., coordinadores. Índice Latinoamericano de Inteligencia Artificial 2025. Santiago: Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe; Centro Nacional de Inteligencia Artificial; 2025.
7. Organización Panamericana de la Salud; Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. Herramienta AI-GUARD: inteligencia artificial. Evaluación de la gobernanza y el uso para un despliegue responsable. Washington, D.C.: OPS; 2026.
8. Organización Médica Colegial de España. Manual de buenas prácticas para la inteligencia artificial en medicina. Madrid: Organización Médica Colegial de España; 2026.
9. World Health Organization. Ethics and governance of artificial intelligence for health: WHO guidance. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021.
10. World Health Organization. Ethics and governance of artificial intelligence for health: guidance on large multimodal models. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2024.
11. European Parliament; Council of the European Union. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence. Official Journal of the European Union. 2024 L 1689.
12. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD AI principles. Paris: OECD; 2024.
13. Topol EJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):44-56. doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0300-7.
14. Rajkomar A, Dean J, Kohane I. Machine learning in medicine. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(14):1347-1358. doi:10.1056/NEJMra1814259.
15. Abràmoff MD, Lavin PT, Birch M, Shah N, Folk JC. Pivotal trial of an autonomous AI-based diagnostic system for detection of diabetic retinopathy in primary care offices. NPJ Digit Med. 2018;1:39. doi:10.1038/s41746-018-0040-6.
16. Lång K, Josefsson V, Larsson AM, Larsson S, Högberg C, Sartor H, et al. Artificial intelligence-supported screen reading versus standard double reading in the Mammography Screening with Artificial Intelligence trial: a clinical safety analysis of a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority, single-blinded, screening accuracy study. Lancet Oncol. 2023;24(8):936-944. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(23)00298-X.
17. Liu J, Zhou R, Liu C, Liu H, Cui Z, Guo Z, et al. Automatic quality control system and adenoma detection rates during routine colonoscopy: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2025;8(1):e2457241. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.57241.
18. Noseworthy PA, Attia ZI, Behnken EM, Giblon RE, Bews KA, Liu S, et al. Artificial intelligence-guided screening for atrial fibrillation using electrocardiogram during sinus rhythm: a prospective non-randomised interventional trial. Lancet. 2022;400(10359):1206-1212. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01637-3.
19. Henry KE, Hager DN, Pronovost PJ, Saria S. A targeted real-time early warning score (TREWScore) for septic shock. Sci Transl Med. 2015;7(299):299ra122. doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.aab3719.
20. Adams R, Henry KE, Sridharan A, Soleimani H, Zhan A, Rawat N, et al. Prospective, multi-site study of patient outcomes after implementation of the TREWS machine learning-based early warning system for sepsis. Nat Med. 2022;28(7):1455-1460. doi:10.1038/s41591-022-01894-0.
21. Curioso WH, Brunette MJ. Inteligencia artificial e innovación para optimizar el proceso de diagnóstico de la tuberculosis. Rev Peru Med Exp Salud Publica. 2020;37(3):554-558. doi:10.17843/rpmesp.2020.373.5585.
22. Alcantara MF, Cao Y, Liu B, Liu C, Zhang N, Zhang P, et al. eRx: a technological advance to speed-up TB diagnostics. Smart Health. 2020;16:100117. doi:10.1016/j.smhl.2020.100117.
23. Scott N, Frota L. Innovation on purpose: leadership and the art of world building. Geneva: International Social Security Association; 2026.
24. Char DS, Shah NH, Magnus D. Implementing machine learning in health care: addressing ethical challenges. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(11):981-983. doi:10.1056/NEJMp1714229.
25. Wiens J, Saria S, Sendak M, Ghassemi M, Liu VX, Doshi-Velez F, et al. Do no harm: a roadmap for responsible machine learning for health care. Nat Med. 2019;25(9):1337-1340. doi:10.1038/s41591-019-0548-6.
26. Kelly CJ, Karthikesalingam A, Suleyman M, Corrado G, King D. Key challenges for delivering clinical impact with artificial intelligence. BMC Med. 2019;17(1):195. doi:10.1186/s12916-019-1426-2.
27. Youssef A, Pencina M, Thakur A, Zhu T, Clifton D, Shah NH. External validation of AI models in health should be replaced with recurring local validation. Nat Med. 2023;29(11):2686-2687. doi:10.1038/s41591-023-02540-z.
28. Collins GS, Moons KGM, Dhiman P, Riley RD, Beam AL, Van Calster B, et al. TRIPOD+AI statement: updated guidance for reporting clinical prediction models that use regression or machine learning methods. BMJ. 2024;385:e078378. doi:10.1136/bmj-2023-078378.
29. Vasey B, Nagendran M, Campbell B, Clifton DA, Collins GS, Denaxas S, et al.; DECIDE-AI expert group. Reporting guideline for the early-stage clinical evaluation of decision support systems driven by artificial intelligence: DECIDE-AI. Nat Med. 2022;28(5):924-933. doi:10.1038/s41591-022-01772-9.
30. Cruz Rivera S, Liu X, Chan AW, Denniston AK, Calvert MJ; SPIRIT-AI and CONSORT-AI Working Group. Guidelines for clinical trial protocols for interventions involving artificial intelligence: the SPIRIT-AI extension. Nat Med. 2020;26(9):1351-1363. doi:10.1038/s41591-020-1037-7.
31. Veeam. Data trust and resilience report 2026. Veeam Insights; 2026.
