ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2024
Simulated Misuse of Large Language Models and Clinical Credit Systems.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) have been proposed to support many healthcare tasks, including disease diagnostics and treatment personalization. While AI may be applied to assist or enhance the delivery of healthcare, there is also a risk of misuse. LLMs could be used to allocate resources via unfair, unjust, or inaccurate criteria. For example, a social credit system uses big data to assess "trustworthiness" in society, penalizing those who score poorly based on evaluation metrics defined only by a power structure (e.g., a corporate entity or governing body). Such a system may be amplified by powerful LLMs which can evaluate individuals based on multimodal data - financial transactions, internet activity, and other behavioral inputs. Healthcare data is perhaps the most sensitive information which can be collected and could potentially be used to violate civil liberty or other rights via a "clinical credit system", which may include limiting access to care. The results of this study show that LLMs may be biased in favor of collective or systemic benefit over protecting individual rights, potentially enabling this type of future misuse. Moreover, experiments in this report simulate how clinical datasets might be exploited with current LLMs, demonstrating the urgency of addressing these ethical dangers. Finally, strategies are proposed to mitigate the risk of developing large AI models for healthcare.
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.