Ethical implications of AI-driven clinical decision support systems on healthcare resource allocation: a qualitative study of healthcare professionals' perspectives.

IF 3 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Cansu Yüksel Elgin, Ceyhun Elgin
{"title":"Ethical implications of AI-driven clinical decision support systems on healthcare resource allocation: a qualitative study of healthcare professionals' perspectives.","authors":"Cansu Yüksel Elgin, Ceyhun Elgin","doi":"10.1186/s12910-024-01151-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Artificial intelligence-driven Clinical Decision Support Systems (AI-CDSS) are increasingly being integrated into healthcare for various purposes, including resource allocation. While these systems promise improved efficiency and decision-making, they also raise significant ethical concerns. This study aims to explore healthcare professionals' perspectives on the ethical implications of using AI-CDSS for healthcare resource allocation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 23 healthcare professionals, including physicians, nurses, administrators, and medical ethicists in Turkey. Interviews focused on participants' views regarding the use of AI-CDSS in resource allocation, potential ethical challenges, and recommendations for responsible implementation. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participant responses are clustered around five pre-determined thematic areas: (1) balancing efficiency and equity in resource allocation, (2) the importance of transparency and explicability in AI-CDSS, (3) shifting roles and responsibilities in clinical decision-making, (4) ethical considerations in data usage and algorithm development, and (5) balancing cost-effectiveness and patient-centered care. Participants acknowledged the potential of AI-CDSS to optimize resource allocation but expressed concerns about exacerbating healthcare disparities, the need for interpretable AI models, changing professional roles, data privacy, and maintaining individualized care.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The integration of AI-CDSS into healthcare resource allocation presents both opportunities and significant ethical challenges. Our findings underscore the need for robust ethical frameworks, enhanced AI literacy among healthcare professionals, interdisciplinary collaboration, and rigorous monitoring and evaluation processes. Addressing these challenges proactively is crucial for harnessing the potential of AI-CDSS while preserving the fundamental values of equity, transparency, and patient-centered care in healthcare delivery.</p>","PeriodicalId":55348,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Ethics","volume":"25 1","pages":"148"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11662436/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-024-01151-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Artificial intelligence-driven Clinical Decision Support Systems (AI-CDSS) are increasingly being integrated into healthcare for various purposes, including resource allocation. While these systems promise improved efficiency and decision-making, they also raise significant ethical concerns. This study aims to explore healthcare professionals' perspectives on the ethical implications of using AI-CDSS for healthcare resource allocation.

Methods: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 23 healthcare professionals, including physicians, nurses, administrators, and medical ethicists in Turkey. Interviews focused on participants' views regarding the use of AI-CDSS in resource allocation, potential ethical challenges, and recommendations for responsible implementation. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.

Results: Participant responses are clustered around five pre-determined thematic areas: (1) balancing efficiency and equity in resource allocation, (2) the importance of transparency and explicability in AI-CDSS, (3) shifting roles and responsibilities in clinical decision-making, (4) ethical considerations in data usage and algorithm development, and (5) balancing cost-effectiveness and patient-centered care. Participants acknowledged the potential of AI-CDSS to optimize resource allocation but expressed concerns about exacerbating healthcare disparities, the need for interpretable AI models, changing professional roles, data privacy, and maintaining individualized care.

Conclusions: The integration of AI-CDSS into healthcare resource allocation presents both opportunities and significant ethical challenges. Our findings underscore the need for robust ethical frameworks, enhanced AI literacy among healthcare professionals, interdisciplinary collaboration, and rigorous monitoring and evaluation processes. Addressing these challenges proactively is crucial for harnessing the potential of AI-CDSS while preserving the fundamental values of equity, transparency, and patient-centered care in healthcare delivery.

人工智能驱动的临床决策支持系统对医疗资源分配的伦理影响:医疗专业人员观点的定性研究。
背景:人工智能驱动的临床决策支持系统(AI-CDSS)越来越多地被集成到医疗保健中,用于各种目的,包括资源分配。虽然这些系统有望提高效率和决策,但它们也引发了重大的伦理问题。本研究旨在探讨医疗保健专业人员对使用AI-CDSS进行医疗保健资源分配的伦理影响的看法。方法:我们对土耳其的23名医疗保健专业人员进行了半结构化定性访谈,包括医生、护士、管理人员和医学伦理学家。访谈的重点是参与者对AI-CDSS在资源分配中的使用、潜在的道德挑战以及负责任实施的建议的看法。数据采用专题分析进行分析。结果:参与者的回答集中在五个预先确定的主题领域:(1)平衡资源分配的效率和公平;(2)AI-CDSS中透明度和可解释性的重要性;(3)临床决策中角色和责任的转变;(4)数据使用和算法开发中的伦理考虑;(5)平衡成本效益和以患者为中心的护理。与会者承认AI- cdss在优化资源分配方面的潜力,但对医疗保健差距的加剧、对可解释的AI模型的需求、专业角色的变化、数据隐私和维持个性化护理等问题表示担忧。结论:将AI-CDSS整合到医疗资源配置中既带来了机遇,也带来了重大的伦理挑战。我们的研究结果强调了建立健全的道德框架、提高医疗保健专业人员的人工智能素养、跨学科合作以及严格的监测和评估流程的必要性。积极应对这些挑战对于利用AI-CDSS的潜力,同时在医疗保健服务中保持公平、透明和以患者为中心的基本价值观至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Medical Ethics
BMC Medical Ethics MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
7.40%
发文量
108
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Ethics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the ethical aspects of biomedical research and clinical practice, including professional choices and conduct, medical technologies, healthcare systems and health policies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信