About
Our mission
Our mission is to help rural and critical access hospitals, and under-resourced clinics and hospitals in the United States and around the world, use AI to work more efficiently, strengthen their finances and, above all, give their patients better care.
Large, well-funded health systems have staff whose job is to evaluate new technology. A 25-bed critical access hospital or a small clinic usually does not, and a single unproven product can waste money and time it cannot spare or put its patients at risk. These hospitals and clinics should benefit from AI as much as the largest systems do. Used well, AI can narrow the gap between the care a small rural hospital or clinic can offer and the care at a large metropolitan medical center.
So we trace every claim to its source, review AI tools, map the laws that govern them and report on federal money for rural care, such as the Rural Health Transformation Program, with these hospitals and clinics in mind. What we learn helping them also teaches us how to help the largest systems.
Who we are
We follow artificial intelligence in medicine every day, from the research and the regulation to the money and the tools that reach the exam room, and sort what matters from the noise for patients and the people who practice medicine on the front lines.
Development and deployment now move too fast for any one clinician to follow, so we built a system to do the sorting. Every item is traced to its original source, and every source is linked, so readers can check the work.
What we publish
A news post every morning, written as straight news with every source linked, which also becomes the daily podcast. The Friday letter, an unsigned editorial on the week that mattered, with specific recommendations. Special topics, longer pieces on a single question. Explainers that answer common questions plainly, a map of state and federal AI health laws, and a letter for patients and families.
Who publishes it
Physician in the Loop publishes this site. Its Pro guides and research briefs are reviewed by Physician in the Loop's physician editor, a board-certified physician, who also directs the work. Neither the company nor the physician editor has a financial relationship with any company mentioned here unless the piece where it appears says so.
What this is not
Medical, legal, or financial advice. It is a reading of the public record, updated daily, with the sources attached so you can check the work.
How this is made
Physician in the Loop is produced with an agentic AI system: software agents that gather the news, draft the text and check it, under rules the publication sets. A practicing physician directs the work.
The daily briefing, the specialty roundups, the AI tool reviews and the law map are researched and written by these agents from public primary sources: agency records and announcements, studies indexed in PubMed, legislative records and companies' own statements. Every fact links to its source, and automated checks enforce the house rules before anything is published. The specialty roundups and the law map's weekly review also pass an independent fact-checking agent that reopens each source, and an editing agent settles what it questions. Each week a separate reader compares the coverage with the week's news to find what was missed. Mistakes are corrected in place and marked.
The Friday letter and the special topics are the publication's own arguments, written by the same agents under the same rules. Each special topic also passes the independent fact check before it runs.
The podcasts are read by AI voices.
Illustrations on this site are made with Google's Gemini image model from our editors' descriptions and checked before they run. Photographs carry their own credits.
Contact
Questions, corrections, news tips and press requests reach us through the contact form.
Latest news
- Stopping statins in adults 70 and older without heart disease met noninferiority in a 1,880-patient trial, though events rose to 12.7% from 9.2%
- AI plaque analysis on coronary CT beat stress-test-guided care at 180 days in a 530-patient trial, the company reports
- FDA asks how to weigh the benefits and risks of robots that operate on their own or are run from afar