ReviewCurrent epidemiology reports2025
AI-Y: An AI Checklist for Population Ethics Across the Global Context.
Review in Current epidemiology reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Smart assistive technologies for neurodisorders: A review on AI, IoT, and wearable systems for enhanced patient care.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose of Review: The goal of this narrative review is to introduce and apply Recent Findings: Recent research highlights a significant disconnect between AI development and ethical implementation, especially in low-resource settings. Studies reveal issues such as homogeneity in the training data, and limited accessibility. Through six global case studies-spanning dementia care in Sweden, environmental forecasting in Europe, suicide prevention in Native American communities, schizophrenia care in India and the U.S., and cervical cancer and tuberculosis diagnosis in Low- and Middle-Income Countries-researchers demonstrate AI's promise in enhancing preparedness diagnosis, screening, and care delivery while also underscoring ethical gaps in accountability, and governance. Summary: Our examination using the AI-Y Checklist found that ethical blind spots are widespread in the development and deployment of AI tools for population health-particularly in areas of model generalizability, accountability, and transparency of AI decision-making. Although AI demonstrates strong potential to enhance disease detection, resource allocation, and preventive care across diverse global settings, most systems evaluated in our six case studies did not meet key ethical criteria such as access, and localized validation and development. The major takeaway is that technical excellence alone is insufficient; ethical alignment is critical to the responsible implementation of AI in public health. The AI-Y Checklist provides a scalable framework to identify risks, guide ethical decision-making, and foster global accountability. For future research, this framework enables standardized evaluation of AI systems, encourages community co-design practices, and supports the creation of policy and governance structures that ensure AI technologies advance health ethics.
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.