article · Babylonian Journal of Artificial Intelligence
Ghana's Public Health Act, 2012 (Act 851) offers an adaptable baseline for managing artificial intelligence in healthcare, though clear regulatory gaps remain. Current legal provisions permit policy documentation, the reporting of algorithmic errors, modernised workplace safety audits, and enforcement actions against non-compliance. However, existing mechanisms require explicit codification of artificial intelligence rules into new legal statutes to handle distinct technical risks. Although the country possesses foundational tools for interim oversight, long-term governance demands targeted investment, institutional staffing, and regulatory modernisation. To prevent medical errors and protect patients, authorities need immediate training programmes for inspection personnel alongside clear accounting rules for algorithms. Bridging these legal vulnerabilities will allow existing statutes to effectively steer the adoption of innovative healthcare systems while new policy frameworks are established.
As artificial intelligence enters medical environments, unmonitored algorithmic errors could compromise patient safety. Understanding how existing public health legislation can oversee new technologies helps regulators avoid medical errors. It ensures that governments can protect patients quickly through current legal mechanisms while designing dedicated rules for emerging digital tools.
This legal analysis informs public health authorities, compliance officers, and healthcare technology developers seeking to deploy artificial intelligence safely in Ghana. By clarifying how existing health acts regulate algorithmic errors and safety audits, the work guides policy and compliance readiness, representing an early-stage regulatory review rather than a ready-to-market product.
AI-generated from the published abstract. Always read the original work before citing.
Purpose: Evaluate the possibilities and limitations of implementing the Essential Ghana Public Health Act to manage the growing development of artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled health care in light of the contemporary gap in research so. Methodology: A review of the 2012 public health regulatory provisions and anti-technology surveillance mechanisms document detailing the needs and risks of AI regulation. Results: Current regulations have a customizable foundation for documenting policies, reporting algorithmic errors, creating updated workplace safety audits, and enforcing non-compliance but required by fully implemented investigations that strong material differences are addressed and that AI-specific rules are codified into new legal rules. Conclusions: Ghana currently has the mechanisms in place for an interim administration to flexibly implement long-term healthcare legislation on gaps awaiting reconciliation through investment in specific sectors, staffing and reforms. Recommendations: Immediate training to prepare inspection personnel before the onset of the crisis is guidelines and rules for algorithmic accounting. What really matters is the effective implementation of existing legislation and the informing of strategies for modernization and certainly also the innovation of policy frameworks for the innovation of new health care systems. Scientific contribution: addresses the knowledge gap in maintaining vulnerabilities for emerging technologies that are tracked by regulations in disruption.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.58496/bjai/2023/006
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
