Carta Healthcare, the award-winning leader in enterprise clinical data management, today released survey findings that show artificial intelligence (AI) delivers the greatest value in healthcare when combined with clinical expertise. The “2026 AI in Healthcare” market research survey is based on responses from healthcare professionals across the United States.
The survey data makes a few things clear. Ninety-seven percent of healthcare professionals say AI should support clinical expertise, not replace it. Seventy-four percent put misinterpretation of complex clinical data at the top of the list when it comes to risks of running AI without human oversight. These are not outliers or edge cases, rather they are the people actually working with these tools every day.
More than half say the most sustainable approach is to introduce AI alongside existing clinical teams. Not replacing them. Not restructuring around automation. Simply making teams more efficient.
Additional findings include:
-
64% say AI delivers the most value when it accelerates work and clinicians validate results
-
74% cite misinterpretation of complex clinical data as a risk without clinician involvement
-
67% say human review or validation is the #1 factor that increases trust in AI outputs
The findings suggest that success with AI in healthcare is not about autonomy. It is about integration. The biggest driver of trust is still human review and validation. Consistent performance over time also matters, along with visibility into how results are produced.
A Clear Path Forward for AI in Healthcare
“The industry is no longer asking whether AI works. It is learning how it works best,” said Brent Dover, CEO of Carta Healthcare. “The answer is not full automation. It is using AI to accelerate the work, with clinicians at the helm. Hybrid Intelligence is how you get both operational gains and trust.”
The industry isn’t saying no to AI. The question is how to apply it without taking on risk you cannot defend, and how to make sure it delivers results you can actually measure. What works best is keeping clinicians at the helm. Full automation sounds efficient. Clinicians at the helm is what holds up under audit, under accreditation review, and in the room when something goes wrong.
