Michigan residents often encounter diagnostic workflows that include automated components—such as decision-support prompts, imaging or lab interpretation software, risk scoring, or documentation tools. These systems can be helpful, but the legal question is usually not “Was AI involved?”
Instead, the question is whether the care team:
- relied on an automated output without appropriate verification,
- missed contraindications, red flags, or alternative explanations,
- failed to act promptly on abnormal results, or
- documented and communicated findings in a way that prevented timely follow-up.
In real life, the harm often comes from the gap between what the tool suggested and what a reasonable clinician would have done next.


