Digital health companies and investors flocked to Nashville, Tennessee, this week for the second annual ViVE conference. Hot topics among the crowd of 7,500 included worries about being “creepy,” the economy and whether ChatGPT is as good as its buildup. Here were five takeaways.

1. ChatGPT is all people want to talk about.

The potential of generative AI applications like ChatGPT and GPT-4 in healthcare was the dominant topic of conversation. Attendees had two schools of thought on the potential of ChatGPT in healthcare, which was summed nicely by Micky Tripathi, chief of the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology.

“I think all of us feel tremendous excitement and you also want to feel tremendous fear,” Tripathi said. 

Michael Hasselberg, chief digital health officer at University of Rochester Medical Center in New York, said he is a believer in the power of generative AI. The large language AI models from ChatGPT developer OpenAI are “light years ahead” of what he’s seen in the marketplace from various startups automating healthcare administrative and revenue cycle processes.

“It’s so easy to use. I have no formal training as a computer scientist and I can program with OpenAI,” Hasselberg said. “I can spin up an application pretty quickly that can solve a lot of the problems that are sitting on top of my workforce right now. Before I was looking at all of these companies to try to solve [those problems] for me.”

Both Hasselberg and Steve Kraus, partner at venture firm Bessemer Venture Partners, said AI models have a lot of potential to automate processes like prior authorization. 

But there was a fair share of skepticism and even fear of generative AI models. Tripathi said that when inappropriately used, algorithms can perpetuate health equity and quality issues. Tom Cassels, CEO of the advisory and consulting arm of Rock Health, agreed.

“What’s dangerous are [digital health companies] who touch clinical practice and are thinking about bringing in big data models by using existing biased medical guidelines and information,” Cassels said. 


2. The economy hurts

Macroeconomic headwinds are hurting the bottom line for digital health startups and health systems. Health systems are suffering from their worst operating income years ever, which means they must be more prudent about digital health investments. Digital health startups are dealing with the worst funding environment in five years. 

The economic realities are unavoidable, said Craig Richardville, chief information officer at Salt Lake City-based Intermountain Health. The health system recorded net operating income of $121 million in 2022—an 81.6% plunge from 2021.

“We’re not immune to the macroeconomics that’s happening within our industry and in other industries,” Richardville said. “What it has caused us to do is raise the bar of what we invest and how we proceed or how we don’t proceed.” 

Hasselberg said he can’t afford to add more digital health software applications that are only addressing a single issue within the health system.  


3. FOMO is over

Fear of missing out is no longer part of the conversation at health systems looking to adopt tech solutions. Getting evidence from companies has never been more important, said Aaron Miri, chief digital and information officer at Jacksonville, Florida-based Baptist Health. 

Startups need to prove they are providing quality care and generating return on investment. “Companies need to do a good job of not selling hype,” Miri said. “We don’t clap for hype. We clap for results. Prove it to us or put your money where your mouth is.”
 


4. Fear of being creepy is real

Creepy is a word that came up regularly during conversations. Health systems and digital health companies are acutely aware of data privacy issues that have come up in the industry. 

In the last two months, digital health companies GoodRx and BetterHelp were fined by the Federal Trade Commission, which said the companies shared the personal health information of millions of consumers with advertisers like Facebook. Health systems have been hit with class-action lawsuits for allegedly sharing patient data with Facebook. 

Sophy Lu, chief information officer at New Hyde Park, New York-based Northwell Health, said the health system is trying to use data to personalize experiences for consumers but doesn’t want to do it in a creepy way. 

“At the end of the day it’s the person’s personal data, not our data at Northwell and not data in the public domain,” Lu said. “We make sure there is consent.” 

Baptist Health’s Miri said he doesn’t think any health system is purposefully trying to spy on its patients. Instead, what happens is the organizations don’t look as closely as they should on whether the tech solutions they’re adopting track and share patient data with third parties. 

“You have to do your due diligence and make sure nothing really creepy is going on,” Miri said. 
 


5. No interest in an American GDPR

Companies don’t have much of an appetite to adopt Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation. Telehealth company Amwell CEO Roy Schoenberg said government oversight is warranted but he called the GDPR laws in Europe “draconian.”

It’s not just digital health company leaders that feel this way. Tampa General Hospital Chief Information Officer Scott Arnold said the privacy law would mean costly investments in cybersecurity. 

“We are very careful with the European companies that we do business with because who wants to be subject to GDPR? It’s a whole new set of investments in cyber that aren’t necessarily bad, but it’s expensive. And we don’t have a lot of experts on European law,” Arnold said. 

This story first appeared in Digital Health Business & Technology.