Defining AI for us, by us: Inside the OsteopathicAI vote

AI is already in the exam room, the residency program and the administrative office. According to Doximity’s 2026 State of AI in Medicine Report, 63% of U.S. physicians report currently using AI in their practice, up from 47% just a year earlier; 94% reported either using AI or being interested in doing so. The profession needed to ask: What does responsible AI use look like through an osteopathic lens? That question now has an answer.

AI’s role in osteopathic care is to augment professional judgment, not replace it. Physicians and their decision-making remain vitally important in modern medicine.

“Let’s define AI for us, by us, before it is defined to us,” noted Ravi Yarid, DO, co-chair of the American Osteopathic Information Association (AOiA)’s Digital Health Innovation (DHI) Steering Committee.

The future of AI in medicine is not something happening to the osteopathic medical profession; it is something the profession can help shape.

What is the OsteopathicAI definition?

The AOiA’s OsteopathicAI definition establishes a “profession-level minimum practice standard for ethical clinician- and patient-centered AI use in osteopathic medicine.”

The OsteopathicAI definition provides guidance on the design, selection, deployment and use of AI across osteopathic education, research, administration and patient care. It amplifies the capabilities of AI in care but emphasizes that AI cannot replace osteopathic professional judgment and whole-person care across body, mind and spirit.

Because AI continues to change rapidly, the definition is intentionally designed to evolve alongside it while remaining grounded in osteopathic principles, staying vendor-neutral and adaptable by design.

“The OsteopathicAI definition is not a product or vendor endorsement, rigid framework or textbook, nor a call to be pro-AI or anti-AI. Rather, it is pro-trust, pro-judgment and pro-osteopathic identity across clinical care, education, research and administration,” stated Carisa Champion, DO, DHI Steering Committee co-chair.

Below are the 9 core requirements of OsteopathicAI-aligned systems:

1. Augmentation and accountability: AI supports the patient-osteopathic physician relationship, clinicians, learners and teams, while a clearly identified and appropriately credentialed human remains accountable for outcomes.
2. Whole-person, relationship-centered intent: Use protects human dignity, autonomy, therapeutic alliance and contextualized whole-person care consistent with osteopathic philosophy.
3. Safety with responsible human oversight: Consequential AI output requires review by an appropriately credentialed and accountable human with authority to override, correct or halt its use. Patient-facing AI interactions must be disclosed, with informed consent for individualized guidance or recommendations when required by law or institutional policy.
4. Truthfulness and transparency: AI systems must clearly communicate their limitations, uncertainty, data use and role in decision-making so users can evaluate and challenge results.
5. Privacy and security by design: AI must protect sensitive data through lawful handling, strong security measures and controls against misuse.
6. Fairness and harm reduction: AI developers and users should actively identify and mitigate bias to reduce inequities and prevent harm, especially for underserved populations.
7. Evidence and validation proportional to risk: The higher the clinical risk of an AI application, the stronger the evidence, validation and ongoing monitoring required.
8. Osteopathic distinctiveness: When AI is used to teach, document, study or support osteopathic medicine, including osteopathic manipulative medicine (OMM), it must be reviewed and validated against osteopathic expertise and principles.
9. Collaboration and lawful de-identified data sharing for learning: Osteopathic entities should support lawful, appropriately governed data sharing for education, quality improvement, research and human betterment. Identifiable and de-identified data must not be used to train open or public models, and any approved training or fine-tuning must occur within controlled environments under explicit agreement.

How we got here

AOiA led this community-driven definition from the ground up, through extensive stakeholder engagement, broad community input and public feedback to ensure the outcome was both practical and representative of the osteopathic medical profession’s shared vision.

A major milestone occurred in June 2026, when the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM) Board of Deans formally supported the definition, which reinforced its academic credibility and cross-organizational alignment.

Following this, the AOA Board of Trustees brought a resolution to the AOA House of Delegates (HOD) for a formal vote to support the effort. In advance of this action, AOiA and the AOA jointly convened a Public Policy Town Hall in Chicago on July 16, creating an open forum for dialogue, education and stakeholder feedback. Throughout this, the DHI Steering Committee co-chairs, Dr. Champion and Dr. Yarid, played a central role in guiding discussions, convening diverse perspectives and shepherding the initiative from concept to consensus.  

What the HOD vote means

With the House of Delegates action in July 2026, the osteopathic medical profession took a significant step toward establishing a shared framework for the responsible use and governance of artificial intelligence.

Resolution H-623 notes that “the American Osteopathic Association (AOA) supports the adoption of safe and effective artificial intelligence tools in clinical practice for patient-centered … care; and be it further … that the AOA endorses the American Osteopathic Information Association (AOiA) definition of OsteopathicAI as a minimum professional standard for patient-centered use of AI in osteopathic medicine.”

The resolution passed, signaling a clear commitment to providing physicians, educators, health systems and professional organizations with shared guidance on how AI should be evaluated, adopted and used across the profession. The adopted resolution also calls for AOiA to provide the House of Delegates with an annual report describing any updates to the OsteopathicAI Definition.

This action gives the osteopathic medical profession a shared professional standard to anchor curricula, clinical adoption and policy. It doesn’t mandate accreditation, regulation or certification; it establishes a foundation that organizations can use to guide education, policy and implementation.

This timing is especially important within the broader healthcare landscape: In June 2026, the Joint Commission launched its Responsible Use of AI in Healthcare (RUAIH) certification program, illustrating that formal AI governance is moving from aspirational guidance into mainstream healthcare quality and oversight infrastructure.

By advancing this work now, the osteopathic medical profession is positioning itself as a proactive leader rather than a reactive one.

What comes next

The next phase will be led by the OsteopathicAI work group, which formally launches this month to establish and present the foundational roadmap for advancing OsteopathicAI across education, clinical practice, research and policy.

During the first six to 12 months, the work group will share the adopted definition, collect implementation feedback and develop supporting educational resources, disclosure practices, simulation tools and supervised workflows.

The definition will remain a living standard, with substantive changes considered through AOiA’s review process and reported annually to the HOD. Over the following two to three years, efforts may expand to include formal governance structures, monitoring frameworks, specialty-specific considerations and alignment with emerging healthcare AI standards.

Central to this effort are the Advancing Digital Education and Physician Transformation (ADEPT) and Advancing Digital Osteopathic Practice Transformation (ADOPT) frameworks, which the work group is developing to give osteopathic physicians and organizations actionable pathways to assess, adopt, govern and responsibly integrate AI, bridging the gap between AI literacy and real-world implementation.

For communication and implementation, the work group will organize its efforts around three action themes:

• Protect the osteopathic relationship—we must safeguard osteopathic care and distinctiveness.
• Prove safety, transparency and accountability—AI must be governed with responsible human oversight.
• Build shared learning and leadership—AI must support education, research, responsible data use and profession-wide collaboration.

Protect. Prove. Build.

We invite leaders to join the Digital Health Innovation (DHI) Community of Practice, a network bridging osteopathic principles and digital innovation through education and connection. Follow the OsteopathicAI work group’s progress and apply the framework within your own organizations and practice settings.

Osteopathic medicine has always been defined by its values, whole-person care, the interconnectedness of body, mind and spirit, and the primacy of the patient-physician relationship. OsteopathicAI is not a departure from that tradition. It’s a declaration that those values belong in the age of AI, too.

To read the full OsteopathicAI Definition, visit AOiA’s site. To join the conversation on shaping its next phase, become part of the DHI Community of Practice.

Related reading:

Q&A: How this combat veteran and lifestyle medicine physician is helping shape digital health

Exploring how physicians can make themselves ‘AI-proof’