Egypt is positioning itself as a regional health technology hub, but the regulatory framework for clinical AI has not kept up with the ambition. Joining me is Sandy Botros, Professor and clinical research professional specialising in healthcare. Sandy, welcome to the show.
Thank you so much.
Before a hospital in Egypt buys an AI system, what does it actually need to have in place?
Before investing heavily in AI, healthcare systems need to have reliable data first — good digital systems and well-trained staff. Installing the system is the easiest part. The hard part is making sure the information going into the AI system is complete, accurate, and consistent. Because AI depends on the information it gets from you. If you give the AI system poor quality data, you cannot expect high quality outcomes.
A study found that 78% of Egyptian public hospitals lack the digital infrastructure AI requires. What does that mean for investors in listed hospital groups?
AI can definitely save time. It can help doctors work more efficiently and reduce unnecessary tests. But if the savings are greater than the cost of the technology, then AI can help the business financially — and we need evidence for this. Just saying a hospital uses AI does not mean it is actually saving money. Buying technology is just the beginning. There is still maintenance, software licence updates, cybersecurity, and staff training that costs money annually. Before buying an AI system, there should be a long-term plan for who will sustain this after the initial purchase. Companies selling these systems cannot depend only on a large one-time sale. They need to offer something hospitals can afford to maintain long-term and demonstrate that the technology actually saves money.
If you were on an investment committee reviewing a healthcare AI pitch for Egypt, what evidence would you demand and what is your red flag?
I would ask three simple questions. Does it really work — does it improve patient care or make the healthcare system more efficient? Does it save money or create enough value to justify the cost? And I would want to see real results over time, not just a short demonstration. My biggest red flag would be a company making very big claims without strong evidence — especially if the technology has not been properly tested on the population where it will actually be used.
Egypt has a data protection law but no AI-specific rules for clinical decisions. When an algorithm contributes to a wrong call, who carries the liability?
Right now I do not think we can simply say it is always the doctor, the hospital, or the technology company. That is exactly why clear rules are important. Doctors have responsibilities when they use AI. Hospitals also have responsibilities for how they introduce and monitor it. Technology companies have responsibilities for the products they develop. Investors need clear rules too, because uncertainty creates financial and legal risks. The rules have to be made clear.
Thank you very much. It has been amazing having these insights. Thank you, Doctor Sandy.
Thank you.
