AMA Calls for ACIP Answers, Stable Federal Funding

Leaders and delegates at this week’s American Medical Association (AMA) annual meeting called for more stable funding for medical care and research, and a US Senate investigation into unprecedented changes to a federal vaccine advisory panel.

AMA delegates passed an emergency resolution asking for that investigation after US Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr earlier this week removed all 17 members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), replacing them with eight new members, some regarded as vaccine skeptics. The resolution also directs AMA to send a letter asking Kennedy to immediately reverse the changes.

Jason M. Goldman, MD, president of the American College of Physicians said at the meeting that Kennedy’s action puts at risk insurance coverage for vaccines. ACIP’s recommendations influence insurance coverage and vaccine uptake.

“As physicians, we must be the voice for our patients,” said Goldman. “We must be the voice for science, evidence, and knowledge, and we must make sure that our institutions are protected.”

Other delegates pressed the AMA to fight back against deep cuts to federal funding for healthcare and medical research.

In his inaugural speech on Tuesday as AMA president, Bobby Mukkamala, MD, an otolaryngologist, said the “importance of access to physician care is very much on my mind.”

“We cannot lose sight of what medicine and science have achieved in our lifetimes, and we cannot abandon this progress and endanger the health of millions whose illnesses could have been treated had we stayed on course,” Mukkamala said.

Congressional Republicans have proposed cutting Medicaid spending and reducing subsidies for plans sold by exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act. Separately, the Trump administration has proposed a roughly 40% cut, or almost $18 billion, in the annual funding of the National Institutes of Health for fiscal 2026, the budget year starting in October.

Mukkamala also called for efforts to reduce the administrative burden of prior authorization and to address Medicare physician payments, which have not kept up with inflation in recent years.

More Transparency for Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Medicine

The AMA also adopted policies regarding AI-driven tools and guidance for physicians regarding corporate investment in their practices.

One policy calls for independent third parties to determine whether an AI tool for clinicians is “explainable” — that it can explain to users its decisions and the evidence behind them. The new AMA policy calls for more transparency regarding these tools, including disclosure of their algorithms.

Physicians at the conference raised concerns about AI-based tools making errors that could potentially harm patients and leave clinicians liable for the tools’ flaws. AMA members’ concerns included the potential for AI hallucinations about billing codes to leave a busy physician at risk for allegations of fraud.

Among those who pushed for the AMA to adopt new policies on AI-driven tools was Jennifer Bryan, MD, chair of the Mississippi delegation to the AMA and president of the Mississippi State Medical Association.

Decisions made at this AMA meeting will help physicians know when “AI informs clinical decisions and exactly how confident the AI is in its recommendations,” Bryan told Medscape Medical News in an email. “This is a big step forward in not just setting standards today but shaping responsible AI practices in medicine for years to come.”

Corporate Intrusion

The AMA delegates also voted to strengthen guidance for physicians regarding corporate or private equity investment in their practices.

Corporate investment can offer an alternative to selling a practice to a hospital or health system, AMA said. These kinds of arrangements can include private or public for-profit companies, investment firms, and insurance companies.

Physicians may benefit from these arrangements by being freed of some business and administrative responsibilities to spend more time with patients.

But such arrangements may also pose risks, including the loss of independent authority over clinical decisions and operations, the AMA said.

AMA’s updated guidance recommends that decisions that should remain in the ultimate control of the physicians partnered with other entities include:

• Determining which diagnostic tests are appropriate for patients.
• Determining the need for referral or consultation with another clinician.
• Determining how many patients a physician should see or how many hours a physician should work.
• Determining the content of patient medical records.
• Making decisions regarding coding and billing procedures for patient care services.

Kerry Dooley Young is a freelance journalist based in Washington, DC. She has covered medical research and healthcare policy for more than 20 years.