Medical visionary Dr. Meskó: Artificial intelligence will improve the doctor-patient relationship
Author: Ņikita Andrejevs (Latvian Radio Correspondent)
Photo: Courtesy of RSU
Artificial intelligence will not harm but rather improve doctor-patient relationships and enhance the work of medical professionals overall, emphasised Dr. Bertalan Meskó—healthcare futurist, leading medical future researcher, and innovation analyst—in an interview with Latvian Radio.
Dr. Meskó visited Rīga Stradiņš University (RSU) to share his insights on the future of healthcare. For over a decade, he has been exploring the industry's development perspectives and leads The Medical Futurist Institute, which studies digitalisation trends in the healthcare sector.
You have been called a futurist for more than 10 years. So, the first question—compared to a decade ago, have we already arrived in the future?
The biggest misconception I see as a futurist is the idea that there is only one future ahead of us. People expect me to predict exactly what will happen and what milestones will be reached. In reality, however, multiple futures exist. I understand that this might sound unusual at first, but we need to get used to the idea that the future is not singular.
Right now, we have the opportunity to observe, analyse, and even choose the future that appeals to us the most.
So, to answer your question—yes, we are in the future. And for the first time, we have the chance to shape the futures we most desire for ourselves, for patients, and for doctors in healthcare. I want people to hear this message: we can be optimistic, we can prepare for the future, and we can choose it.
We often encounter situations where advanced technologies exist, but the users lack digital skills. This is also a challenge among the population of Latvia. Is it possible to address this issue?
Absolutely. Of course, the healthcare sector needs some new technologies, but it has already become entirely dependent on them. In virtually every country, it is impossible to practice medicine or provide healthcare without relying on a range of advanced technologies. So, the issue is not about creating even more technology—it is about whether we can prepare people and equip all stakeholders in the healthcare system to use them effectively. That is why we, as medical futurists, have been speaking out and publishing scientific articles on this topic for over a decade. The digital transformation of healthcare is not merely a technological shift—it is a cultural paradigm change. It may seem that healthcare is all about technology, but
in reality, the most significant transformations are happening in the relationship between patients and doctors,
as they now have to navigate and utilise an increasing array of advanced technologies. So, if I were a policymaker, decision-maker, or national leader in healthcare, I would certainly allocate significant resources to help all stakeholders—patients and doctors—find new ways to build relationships using advanced technologies.
We are living in a time when artificial intelligence is the key technology being referenced in almost every possible context. I understand that you cannot predict the future, but do you anticipate other equally significant breakthroughs?
It is true that I dislike making predictions, as that would imply there is only one possible future. However, I take pride in the achievements and trends we have identified at the Medical Futurism Institute over the past ten and a half years. Looking ahead to the next five or ten years, what fascinates me the most is how automation will take over repetitive, data-driven tasks in every doctor’s work. The reality is that we, as those working within healthcare, have made doctors' lives miserable—with electronic patient records and excessive administrative burdens. Poorly designed technologies have only made their work harder.
Now is the time to change that. We are entering an era where automation will handle all the tasks that healthcare professionals should not be wasting their time on—
those that do not require their expertise, creativity, understanding, or intuition. Instead, we must give them more time to spend with their patients. Alongside automation—undoubtedly the biggest "elephant in the room"—I am also deeply interested in digital therapeutics. These are evidence-based scientific approaches that do not rely on medication but instead use mobile applications and at-home blood testing. Of course, this still feels somewhat like science fiction, but the body of evidence supporting these innovations continues to grow. Perhaps, in the future, individuals with mental health issues or diabetes could achieve the same results as they would with medication—simply by leveraging technology.
One of the ideas you have strongly advocated for is patient involvement in shaping the healthcare system. Has this idea been heard?
I hope so. For more than a decade, I have been saying that it is not enough for healthcare to be patient-centred. Nowadays, every approach is patient-centred, but for patients, this remains a passive process. You might ask patients what they want to see in the final design, product, or service, but ultimately, you—not them—decide whether their input is important. Patients remain passive participants. What we truly need today is patient engagement at the highest levels of decision-making. A Minister of Health, for example, should have a patient advisory group that speaks with them directly. In pharmaceutical companies, this should be at the executive level. Without this level of involvement, how can we expect to create products, technologies, and services for patients without including them in the highest levels of decision-making?
Have you come across examples of this approach being implemented globally?
The world’s leading regulatory agency, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), established a patient advisory group several years ago. This has been one of the best examples of how real-world patient engagement can benefit them. Today, in my talk, I will also share an example from the Netherlands, where patients were invited to provide input before a hospital building was even constructed. As a result, the new hospital looks exactly as the patients envisioned it. That is the best example of true patient engagement.
Bertalanu Meško intervē Latvijas Radio korespondents Ņikita Andrejevs
What have you observed regarding European universities and artificial intelligence?
I see that universities are trying to integrate artificial intelligence. Here, I am mainly referring to medical schools rather than universities in general. They want to introduce AI, but often, the people pushing for it do not fully understand it. I am not saying that every university leader needs to become an AI expert. However, they must have a clear and scientific understanding of its fundamental principles. There needs to be trust in the technology, backed by knowledge, in order to implement it effectively. Without basic knowledge, an understanding of methodologies, and awareness of both the risks and benefits, I do not see how university leaders can introduce AI in a way that ensures their students do not end up being far more knowledgeable about it than they are.
Source: LSM.lv
