Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41767681›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in veterinary science2026

Ethical considerations of artificial intelligence in veterinary medicine decision-making.

Matt Heinlein

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Matt HeinleinTLC Animal Hospital, El Paso, TX, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rapid growth and development of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is leading to a paradigm shift across multiple disciplines of decision-making. Veterinary medicine is an area wherein this proliferation offers profound potential for advancement, but is also ripe with potential ethical dilemmas resulting from the assimilation of AI technology into the decision-making process. While AI can increase accessibility of advanced veterinary care and improve efficiency of clinical and administrative workflow, the successful implementation of it into veterinary decision making requires assessment of key areas. These areas are the accuracy and reliability of AI diagnostic interpretations, the ethical implications of bias in AI algorithms, stewardship of privacy and personal data, and the balance of innovation with legal and professional responsibilities of animal welfare. Results of this review found that AI should aid, not replace, veterinary professional decision-making. To that end, continued research into accuracy and vigilance to mitigate bias is necessary, foundational standards for AI use and education must be enacted, and further research into the effect of AI on clinically ambiguous cases is imperative to safeguard the ethical standards of veterinary decision-making.

Indexed as

accuracyartificial intelligencebiasdecision- makingethicsmedicineveterinary

Identifiers

PMID41767681
PMCPMC12947261

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.