Blog

From clicks to clinical impact

Beyond point-of-care support, clinical decision support solutions also offer powerful analytics. “We’re not just tracking usage—we’re translating it into insights,” said Fulcher. “We can show hospitals what clinicians are searching for, how that aligns with prescribing patterns, and where there are gaps in knowledge or compliance.”

Integration and accessibility: Meeting clinicians where they are

To maximize impact, clinical decision support tools must be embedded into clinical workflows. “The ideal solution is one click away—within the EMR, mobile app, or even Microsoft Copilot,” said Fulcher. “We’re building a hub-and-spoke model where trusted content is accessible wherever clinicians need it.”

Dr. Ahmed Al-Dammas, Chief Data Officer at the Saudi Council of Health Insurance, stressed the importance of seamless access: “If it’s not integrated, it’s not used. Single sign-on, mobile optimization, and HL7 integration are no longer nice-to-haves — they’re must-haves.”

While the clinical benefits are clear, the financial case is equally compelling. “CDS tools reduce adverse drug events, shorten hospital stays, and improve formulary compliance,” said Dr. Abu-Gheida. “That’s real ROI—especially in value-based care models.”

Dr. Osama Hassan added, “If we want to move from fee-for-service to outcomes-based reimbursement, we need solutions that link decisions to results. Wolters Kluwer’s UpToDate® and Medi-Span® do exactly that.”

Looking ahead: A shared vision for safer, smarter care

As the Think Tank concluded, one message resonated: precision medicine is a team sport. It requires collaboration across clinicians, technologists, regulators, and solution providers.

“We’re not just building tools—we’re building trust,” said Fulcher. “And that trust is what turns insight into impact.”

OpenAI announced plans on Tuesday to relax restrictions on its ChatGPT chatbot, including allowing erotic content for verified adult users as part of what the company calls a “treat adult users like adults” principle.

OpenAI’s plan includes the release of an updated version of ChatGPT that will allow users to customize their AI assistant’s personality, including options for more human-like responses, heavy emoji use, or friend-like behavior. The most significant change will come in December, when OpenAI plans to roll out more comprehensive age-gating that would permit erotic content for adults who have verified their ages. OpenAI did not immediately provide details on its age verification methods or additional safeguards planned for adult content.

The company launched a dedicated ChatGPT experience for under-18 users in September, with automatic redirection to age-appropriate content that blocks graphic and sexual material.

It also said it was developing behavior-based age prediction technology that estimates whether a user is over or under 18 based on how they interact with ChatGPT.

In a post on X, Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, said that stricter guardrails on conversational AI to address mental health concerns had made its chatbot “less useful/enjoyable to many users who had no mental health problems”.

The stricter safety controls came after Adam Raine, a California teenager, died by suicide earlier this year, with his parents filing a lawsuit in August claiming ChatGPT provided him with specific advice on how to kill himself. Just two months later, Altman said the company has “been able to mitigate the serious mental health issues”.

The US Federal Trade Commission had also launched an inquiry into several tech companies, including OpenAI, over how AI chatbots potentially negatively affect children and teenagers.

“Given the seriousness of the issue we wanted to get this right,” Altman said Tuesday, arguing that OpenAI’s new safety tools now allow the company to ease restrictions while still addressing serious mental health risks.

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

Your guide to what Trump’s second term means for Washington, business and the world

Glass Lewis said it would stop issuing single voting positions on proxy issues and instead offer multiple perspectives to clients, after facing criticism from Republicans over diversity and environmental criteria.

Starting in 2027, Glass Lewis will offer recommendations based on views that are oriented towards management, governance, activism or sustainability. 

“We recognise that a single perspective is no longer sufficient,” Glass Lewis said in a position paper seen by the Financial Times on Tuesday. “Transitioning to a fully client-driven policy model will ultimately put all proxy voting control in the hands of shareholders, empowering them to vote in accordance with their specific beliefs and priorities.”

The firm’s move follows a similar decision by the other major proxy advisory business, Institutional Shareholder Services. Earlier this month, ISS introduced governance research services that do not include voting recommendations and provide customisable data, analysis and recommendations to its clients.

Glass-Lewis said one of the primary drivers of the shift was the “growing divergence” between American and European institutional investors who have taken different approaches to fiduciary duty and sustainability. European clients already rely more on thematic policies rather than benchmark views.

Glass Lewis’s new voting practice comes as proxy advisers have become increasingly scrutinised by public companies and Republican officials over prioritising matters related to environmental, social and governance, and diversity, equity and inclusion. Glass Lewis and ISS are both suing Texas over a state law that limits the guidance that proxy advisers can give to shareholders on corporate governance, diversity and environmental practices.

The proxy adviser’s latest move could blunt some of the criticism that it provides “ideologically driven” recommendations as it moves to give clients more choice to vote in line with their own beliefs and priorities.

Glass Lewis already offers custom voting recommendations to clients but ending its benchmark guidance would push all of its customers under a custom framework. 

“They seem to trying to transition clients to develop more specific policy guidelines, which not only takes Glass Lewis out of the line of fire but also makes more money for Glas Lewis,” said Ann Lipton, a law professor at the University of Colorado.

“I think their ultimate goal is transition to the more expensive and profitable business model.”