The Netherlands should adopt a dedicated artificial intelligence strategy for healthcare, provided it remains grounded in practical application, according to the chief medical information officer at one of the country’s leading university hospitals.
Tom van der Laan, who holds that role at the University Medical Centre Groningen, was responding to an OECD report that found the Netherlands is among 22 member countries lacking a dedicated health AI strategy. Only seven of the OECD’s 38 members have such a framework in place, with a further nine partially meeting the criteria.
“For doctors and healthcare professionals on the ground, the biggest problem is not a lack of interest in AI,” Van der Laan said. “The problem is uncertainty: what is safe, what is legally acceptable, what is clinically validated, who is responsible, and how these tools should be implemented in real workflows.”
Dutch health consultancy IG&H has argued that a centralised strategy would bring greater clarity to the technology’s potential applications. “It allows for one central vision on key topics such as the safety of patient data and when and where AI can be used within the healthcare domain,” a spokesperson said.
AI struggles for healthcare organisations
The company believes this would provide clarity, as many healthcare organisations are struggling with the risks of AI. This could also widen gaps between well-resourced hospitals and smaller providers, the consultancy warned.
Van der Laan said a good strategy would define common principles for validation, monitoring, and liability, while preventing every hospital from solving the same problems separately. “That is inefficient, expensive, and creates unequal access to safe innovation,” he said.
In an October 2025 letter to the House of Representatives, former Dutch Health Minister Bruijn flagged the lack of a shared vision in implementing AI in healthcare. A spokesperson for the Ministry’s AI affairs did not respond to questions on whether this remains the case.
However, he warned against implementing strategies that prescribe exactly how clinicians should work. “The national level should set the guardrails, infrastructure, evidence standards, and incentives. Hospitals and clinical teams should decide how AI can safely add value in their own context,” he said.
IG&H said it has observed an increasing need for AI adoption among staff and is currently helping clients implement AI via chatbots to find information and through administrative and decision support tools quickly. Many leaders are said to feel the need to embed AI in the organisation, but they experience a gap between the willingness and abilities of employees and the increasing possibilities of AI.
IG&H says its adoption programmes focus on building AI literacy among all employees. These include practical skills, such as using Copilot or Claude. They also include the skill to follow AI developments and develop a growth mindset. Van der Laan emphasised that AI training should be practical, short, role-specific and embedded in the workflows clinicians already use.
Doctors don’t need to become data scientists
“Doctors do not need to become data scientists, but they do need enough AI literacy to understand limitations, risks, appropriate use, and their own responsibility,” he said.
Doctors are already encountering situations where the correct use of AI is not always clear. Examples include generative AI for summarisation, patient communication, and clinical decision support.
“Sometimes the question is not simply whether the technology works, but whether the output may be relied upon, how it should be checked, how patients should be informed, and whether the tool falls under medical device regulation,” Van der Laan said.
[VA, BM]
Originally written by: Christoph Schwaiger
Image credit: ismagilov / Getty Images
Source: Euractiv
Published on: 5 June 2026
Link to original article: Netherlands lacks dedicated health AI strategy, hospitals face legal uncertainty
