Patients Often Come in with a Printed Output from a Chatbot
ChatGPT is not a doctor, yet people still turn to it with health-related questions, much as they once did with Google Search. What is the difference? Neurologist and AI adviser to the Minister of Health Ondřej Volný explains.
There are many conferences on artificial intelligence today. Why add another one?
Because our AdvanceMed conference is different. It focuses exclusively on healthcare and medicine, and that is the difference. We are not trying to provide a broad overview of the entire field of AI; we want to get specific information to specific people: doctors, nurses, hospital management, but also patients and patient organisations.
The motto of the second year was that it was a conference for everyone – students, developers, start-ups and representatives of venture capital funds all attended. Alongside the Minister of Health, the Government Commissioner for Artificial Intelligence also took part. This year, we welcomed guests from Poland, Slovakia, the United States, Sweden, and a representative of the World Health Organization. A conference like this had been missing in Central Europe.
Do you focus only on lectures, or does something tangible come out of it as well?
It is important to me that the conference has practical outcomes. Every year, in cooperation with the Moravian-Silesian Innovation Centre, we organise a so-called Pitch Deck Session, where students and young developers present their solutions directly to potential investors and receive feedback.
One result of this cooperation, for example, was the Healthcare Challenge 4.0 competition, held under the auspices of the Minister and taking place at VSB – Technical University of Ostrava. A hospital comes with a specific problem, and students and doctoral students propose a solution. We also have feedback from participants who are now holding discussions about the commercialisation of their projects.
Patients today commonly ask chatbots questions about their health. How is medicine responding to this?
With a certain delay, but it is responding. The Ministry of Health, in cooperation with our specialist society and the Czech Association for Artificial Intelligence, has prepared an AI guide for patients, which is available to download free of charge and was also created with the involvement of the National Association of Patient Organisations.
That is one outcome. The second is that we are finally talking about it openly.
We know from studies that roughly one fifth of all questions people around the world ask language models are related to health – either their own or that of someone close to them. This is not a marginal issue. And I can confirm it from my own neurology clinic: patients come in with a printed document that was created during a conversation with a chatbot. General practitioners from the Moravian-Silesian Region tell me the same thing. We have to be prepared for this.
Is it a problem, or an opportunity?
Both. The problem is that ordinary language models are not medical devices, because they are not trained primarily on medical data; they carry the risk of hallucinations, and their outputs may not always be reliable. I see the opportunity in the fact that a patient who receives a complicated report from a doctor can have it explained simply by a chatbot. That is a legitimate use.
OpenAI, after all, recently launched ChatGPT Health, a model focused on health-related topics. For now, it only operates in the United States, because stricter regulations apply in Europe. But the direction is clear: both OpenAI and Anthropic are aware of how large a share of health-related queries is directed at their platforms, and they are responding by developing more specialised tools.
Where is artificial intelligence genuinely working in Czech healthcare? Not in pilot projects, but in real-world practice?
The only AI-based solution that is currently reimbursed by health insurance in Czechia is screening for diabetic retinopathy. The back of the eye of a patient with diabetes is photographed by a device, the image is assessed by AI, and the result is reported to the insurance company as a standard procedure. For now, this remains an exception.
Other certified solutions function as so-called decision support systems – a second pair of eyes for a radiologist or specialist. For example, in the analysis of mammography images, some healthcare facilities offer women the option of having the image assessed by AI for an additional fee. But the final say always belongs to the doctor. The principle of humans in the loop applies, and will continue to apply.
How long does it take for an AI solution to obtain medical device certification in Czechia?
Today, we are looking at around twelve to eighteen months. This is certification under the European MDR regulation and, more recently, also in the context of the AI Act. A product with AI elements goes through independent certification authorities, which assess whether it is of sufficient quality, comparable with human experts, and whether adequate testing has been carried out.
The aim is to shorten this process to six months or even less – and certification bodies also need to have enough staff who understand AI.
How do general practitioners even find out about the wide range of AI tools?
Our specialist society, which oversees the AdvanceMed conference, began working this year with the Association of General Practitioners of the Moravian-Silesian Region and is organising a half-day lecture and practical seminar for them, focused on what GPs and outpatient specialists currently have available.
Many of them simply do not know about these tools. There are solutions for handling telephone conversations between patients and outpatient clinics, administrative tools, smart stethoscopes with AI, and Czech solutions for ECG analysis. All of this is available, but only if you find out about it.
You have published a comprehensive monograph on AI in healthcare. Who did you write it for?
Primarily for healthcare professionals: doctors, nurses, radiographers and hospital management. It covers all fields in which certified AI solutions already exist: dermatology, cardiology, gastroenterology, neurology, psychiatry and telemedicine. It also includes chapters on legal issues, data protection and data handling.
However, we wrote it in a way that is also understandable for non-healthcare professionals. We are now preparing a second book, which will focus specifically on general practitioners and outpatient specialists. It should be published later this year.
What does AI education for doctors look like? Is it systematic, or does it depend on individual initiative?
For now, it depends more on initiative. AI is not yet a compulsory part of postgraduate medical education. The Faculty of Medicine at the University of Ostrava was the first in Czechia and Slovakia to establish its own Department of Artificial Intelligence; I have the honour of serving as its head.
In February, we organised a full-day hybrid Med-AI seminar for medical students from across Czechia and Slovakia, under the auspices of the ministers of both countries. A representative of the WHO also expressed interest in the seminar, so it is possible that we will bring the format to other countries as well.
At the Institute for Postgraduate Medical Education, a Department of AI has been established and there are already specific courses for doctors after graduation. These are the first systematic steps. But the pace at which AI is developing is faster than the pace of educational institutions. That is why we write books, organise conferences, and representatives of our specialist society, CSAIM ČLS JEP, are regularly invited to cardiology, neurology, psychiatry and ENT congresses, where we say: this exists, this is something you should know about.
Virtual reality (VR) is increasingly being used as a rehabilitation tool in hospitals. What benefits does it offer, and does it also have a role in home-based rehabilitation?
Our department collaborates with VR Vitalis, a certified medical device. We have tested virtual reality rehabilitation in patients recovering from stroke as well as in patients with Parkinson’s disease. The results are promising: patients who exercised in virtual reality showed greater motivation to continue rehabilitation with their physiotherapists. A virtual environment enriched with gamification elements is simply more engaging and appealing than a hospital room.
We are also conducting a research study examining the impact of VR on mood and anxiety reduction after stroke—complications that are commonly seen in these patients. And yes, rehabilitation in a home setting is a realistic option. Patients could perform their exercises at home, provided they have a reliable internet connection and support from someone who can supervise them while they are wearing the headset to prevent injury. The headsets can be loaned to patients, but reimbursement is not yet available. However, a regulatory process is currently underway to introduce reimbursement codes and coverage for these devices as well.
The interview was published in POSITIV Business & Style.
Updated: 19. 06. 2026
