Healthcare
Research and clinical-adjacent organisations work with genomic, epidemiological and patient-adjacent data that cannot leave the institution and cannot be acted on without expert review. This page sets out how such a workflow would be planned and run on inTheEU Assist, not a record of a completed deployment.
How the workflow would be structured
Institutional data (genomic records, epidemiological datasets, patient-adjacent case material) would be ingested and indexed on premises, feeding a knowledge pack scoped to the institution's own tenant. No document or dataset crosses into any other tenant on the platform.
An agent configured for the workflow would propose candidate signals, findings, or risk flags from that knowledge base, each one tied to a specific case or dataset and entered with a status of proposed. Nothing is treated as established, and nothing reaches a patient record or a published finding, until a named clinician or researcher reviews and signs off on it.
Where human approval sits
Every stage that produces a flag, a summary, or a recommendation would require explicit approval before the next stage opens. This is not a policy layered on top of the workflow. It is the mechanism by which the workflow proceeds at all: an unapproved stage simply does not execute the next step.
What this draws on today, and what it does not
The risk-flagging workflow, the proposed-to-approved review lifecycle, and the signed audit chain behind every action are working parts of the platform. What is not part of this: any pre-built genomic, epidemiological, or clinical analysis capability. The domain judgement in a healthcare deployment would remain with the institution's own clinicians and researchers throughout, and any domain-specific analysis skill would be developed alongside them, not supplied as an off-the-shelf model.
Some of the architecture underlying this capability set is documented in filings still in progress. This page describes what the platform is designed to do, at a level appropriate for planning a pilot, not an implementation specification.
Platform features and interface are subject to continuous improvement. Descriptions in this guide may not reflect the exact layout or wording of the latest released version.