Utah Just Let an Algorithm Write Prescriptions

Physician oversight waived in state sandbox; federal review status unclear

By
Kerri Miller
April 13, 2026
3 min

MDSpire News

Objective:

To examine Utah's decision to allow an AI system to prescribe medications without direct physician involvement and its implications, including ethical, legal, and clinical aspects.

Approach:

Key Findings:

AI prescribing could address primary care shortages and improve medication access.
No FDA review has been demonstrated for the AI prescribing system.
The evaluation of AI concordance with clinician decisions was unblinded, not peer-reviewed, and occurred in a different clinical context.

Interpretation:

The authors raise concerns about the regulatory and liability implications of AI prescribing, emphasizing the need for established safety, effectiveness evidence, and a clear liability framework.

Limitations:

Absence of peer-reviewed evidence for the AI system's safety and effectiveness.
Unclear application of federal law regarding prescription drug authorization, which may affect the legality of AI prescribing.
Potential challenges in pursuing liability claims against AI systems due to lack of transparency in clinical decision-making.

Conclusion:

Robust evidence of safety and effectiveness, along with clear regulatory frameworks, should be required before integrating AI prescribing into routine care.