Evidence mapPaperPMID 42269012Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026

Ethical Governance of Large Language Models in Health Care: Trust, Responsibility, and Equity in Routine Use.

Xiongwen Yang, Chuan Xu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Xiongwen Yang *Department of Thoracic Surgery, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, 83 Zhongshan East Road, Guiyang, Guizhou, 550002, China, 86 18620726507, 86 18620726507.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4968-8953
Chuan Xu *Department of Thoracic Surgery, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, 83 Zhongshan East Road, Guiyang, Guizhou, 550002, China, 86 18620726507, 86 18620726507.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-5849-8780

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Unlabelled: Large language models (LLMs) are becoming increasingly embedded in routine health care communication, raising ethical challenges that extend beyond model performance alone. This Viewpoint argues that ethical risks in LLM-enabled health care emerge through patterns of reliance, institutional embedding, and governance during real-world use. Using "adoption-phase ethics" as an analytic lens, this paper examines 3 interrelated dimensions of ethical risk. First, trust in LLM-enabled health care is shaped not only by technical accuracy, but also by institutional and relational conditions surrounding its use. Second, responsibility may become distributed and ambiguous when LLM-mediated information influences clinical communication and decision-making. Third, equity concerns arise from unequal capacities to interpret, contest, and benefit from LLM-generated information. We argue that ethical governance of LLMs in health care requires continuous, system-level oversight that extends beyond model evaluation alone, including clear accountability structures, role-sensitive implementation, and equity-oriented governance practices. By reframing ethical analysis around routine integration rather than technical performance alone, this Viewpoint aims to support more responsible and sustainable use of LLMs in health care.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareLarge Language ModelsSocial ResponsibilityTrustHumansequity and trustethical governancehealth care communicationlarge language modelsmedical ethicsresponsibilitytechnology adoption

Identifiers

PMID42269012
PMCPMC13252702

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.