Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42601485›Full record

ArticleJournal of religion and health2026

Medical AI and Human Dignity: A Catholic Normative Ethical Framework in Light of Magnifica Humanitas.

Anton Heinrich L Rennesland, Joshua Cedric Aquino Gundayao

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of religion and health, 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. Article
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.

Anton Heinrich L RenneslandResearch Center for Culture, Arts, and Humanities, University of Santo Tomas, Manila, Philippines.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6136-1905
Joshua Cedric Aquino GundayaoResearch Center for Culture, Arts, and Humanities, University of Santo Tomas, Manila, Philippines. jagundayao@ust.edu.ph.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3623-5947

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly reshaping healthcare through advances in prediction and personalization, yet these developments also raise questions that are not merely technical but also are moral and religious. This article offers a normative framework for Catholic engagement with medical AI in light of Leo XIV's Magnifica Humanitas (2026). Drawing on the encyclical's critique of the "Babel Syndrome," we argue that medical AI is dehumanizing in two principal ways: first, through an idolatry of optimization that reduces the person to a data source; and second, through an illusion of algorithmic perfection that treats vulnerability and finitude as technical defects to be overcome. In response, we propose a roadmap grounded in Catholic social teaching and structured around three principles: non-substitution, algorithmic transparency and accountability, and solidarity with the preferential option for the poor. We further show how these principles deepen and reinterpret the bioethical principles of autonomy, beneficence and non-maleficence, and justice in AI-mediated care. Finally, we draw out concrete implications for healthcare institutions and relevant stakeholders. Rather than rejecting AI, we argue that Catholic healthcare ethics should further uphold the alignment of technological innovation to the dignity of the human person, the common good, and the healing vocation of medicine.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceCatholic bioethicsMagnifica HumanitasMedical ethicsTechnocratic paradigm

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.