ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2021
Teasing out Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: An Ethical Critique of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Medicine.
Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial Intelligence Technologies Supporting Nurses' Clinical Decision-Making: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Pooled it
- Ethical and Regulatory Perception of Artificial Intelligence Among Dental Students: A Cross-Sectional Study.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026Article
- The Algorithm's Blindspot: An Ethical Critique of Data-Fetishism and the Deskilling of the Clinical Gaze in Ophthalmology.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
- Ethical and Governance Challenges of AI in Medical Imaging and Diagnostics: A Systematic Survey and Policy Framework Recommendations.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- AI in Drug Discovery: Clinical Failures, Regulatory Reality, and the Validation Crisis Behind the Hype.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Seven deadly sins in artificial intelligence for digital medicine.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Doing philosophy and the future of the 'good doctor' paradigm.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2025Article
- How Could Artificial Intelligence Change the Doctor-Patient Relationship? A Medical Ethics Perspective.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Medical Education Strategies for Otolaryngology in the Online World and the Role of Podcasting.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
- Integrating New Technologies in Lipidology: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Are Treatment Services Ready for the Use of Big Data Analytics and AI in Managing Opioid Use Disorder?Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- What Is the Role of Explainability in Medical Artificial Intelligence? A Case-Based Approach.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Ethics of AI in healthcare: a scoping review demonstrating applicability of a foundational framework.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
- Digital-Tier Strategy Improves Newborn Screening for Glutaric Aciduria Type 1.International journal of neonatal screening · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence, ethics, and hospital medicine: Addressing challenges to ethical norms and patient-centered care.Journal of hospital medicine · 2024Article
- The Co-Piloting Model for Using Artificial Intelligence Systems in Medicine: Implementing the Constrained-Disorder-Principle-Based Second-Generation System.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Artificial Intelligence Readiness, Perceptions, and Educational Needs Among Dental Students: A Cross-Sectional Study.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2024Article
- Clearing the Fog: A Scoping Literature Review on the Ethical Issues Surrounding Artificial Intelligence-Based Medical Devices.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Integrating ethics in AI development: a qualitative study.BMC medical ethics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid adoption and implementation of artificial intelligence in medicine creates an ontologically distinct situation from prior care models. There are both potential advantages and disadvantages with such technology in advancing the interests of patients, with resultant ontological and epistemic concerns for physicians and patients relating to the instatiation of AI as a dependent, semi- or fully-autonomous agent in the encounter. The concept of libertarian paternalism potentially exercised by AI (and those who control it) has created challenges to conventional assessments of patient and physician autonomy. The unclear legal relationship between AI and its users cannot be settled presently, an progress in AI and its implementation in patient care will necessitate an iterative discourse to preserve humanitarian concerns in future models of care. This paper proposes that physicians should neither uncritically accept nor unreasonably resist developments in AI but must actively engage and contribute to the discourse, since AI will affect their roles and the nature of their work. One's moral imaginative capacity must be engaged in the questions of beneficence, autonomy, and justice of AI and whether its integration in healthcare has the potential to augment or interfere with the ends of medical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.