Commentary: Trustworthy and ethical AI in digital mental healthcare – wishful thinking or tangible goal?

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Ellen Svensson , Walter Osika , Per Carlbring
{"title":"Commentary: Trustworthy and ethical AI in digital mental healthcare – wishful thinking or tangible goal?","authors":"Ellen Svensson ,&nbsp;Walter Osika ,&nbsp;Per Carlbring","doi":"10.1016/j.invent.2025.100844","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The use of AI in digital mental healthcare promises to make treatments more effective, accessible, and scalable than ever before. At the same time, the use of AI opens a myriad of ethical concerns, including the lack of transparency, the risk of bias leading to increasing social inequalities, and the risk of responsibility gaps. This raises a crucial question: Can we rely on these systems to deliver care that is both ethical and effective? In attempts to regulate and ensure the safe usage of AI-powered tools, calls to trustworthy AI systems have become central. However, the use of terms such as “trust” and “trustworthiness” risks increasing anthropomorphization of AI systems, attaching human moral activities, such as trust, to artificial systems. In this article, we propose that terms such as “trustworthiness” be used with caution regarding AI and that when used, they should reflect an AI system's ability to consistently demonstrate measurable adherence to ethical principles, such as respect for human autonomy, nonmaleficence, fairness, and transparency. On this approach, trustworthy and ethical AI has the possibility of becoming a tangible goal rather than wishful thinking.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48615,"journal":{"name":"Internet Interventions-The Application of Information Technology in Mental and Behavioural Health","volume":"41 ","pages":"Article 100844"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Internet Interventions-The Application of Information Technology in Mental and Behavioural Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214782925000454","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The use of AI in digital mental healthcare promises to make treatments more effective, accessible, and scalable than ever before. At the same time, the use of AI opens a myriad of ethical concerns, including the lack of transparency, the risk of bias leading to increasing social inequalities, and the risk of responsibility gaps. This raises a crucial question: Can we rely on these systems to deliver care that is both ethical and effective? In attempts to regulate and ensure the safe usage of AI-powered tools, calls to trustworthy AI systems have become central. However, the use of terms such as “trust” and “trustworthiness” risks increasing anthropomorphization of AI systems, attaching human moral activities, such as trust, to artificial systems. In this article, we propose that terms such as “trustworthiness” be used with caution regarding AI and that when used, they should reflect an AI system's ability to consistently demonstrate measurable adherence to ethical principles, such as respect for human autonomy, nonmaleficence, fairness, and transparency. On this approach, trustworthy and ethical AI has the possibility of becoming a tangible goal rather than wishful thinking.
评论:数字心理医疗中值得信赖和道德的人工智能——一厢情愿还是切实可行的目标?
人工智能在数字精神医疗中的应用有望使治疗比以往任何时候都更有效、更容易获得、更可扩展。与此同时,人工智能的使用引发了无数的伦理问题,包括缺乏透明度、导致社会不平等加剧的偏见风险,以及责任差距的风险。这就提出了一个关键问题:我们能否依靠这些系统来提供既合乎道德又有效的护理?为了规范和确保人工智能工具的安全使用,对值得信赖的人工智能系统的呼吁已经成为核心。然而,使用“信任”和“可信赖”等术语可能会增加人工智能系统的人格化,将人类的道德活动(如信任)附加到人工系统上。在本文中,我们建议谨慎使用诸如“可信度”之类的术语,并且当使用时,它们应该反映人工智能系统始终如一地展示可衡量的遵守道德原则的能力,例如尊重人类自主性,非恶意,公平性和透明度。在这种方法下,值得信赖和道德的人工智能有可能成为一个切实的目标,而不是一厢情愿的想法。
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
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
9.30%
发文量
94
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Official Journal of the European Society for Research on Internet Interventions (ESRII) and the International Society for Research on Internet Interventions (ISRII). The aim of Internet Interventions is to publish scientific, peer-reviewed, high-impact research on Internet interventions and related areas. Internet Interventions welcomes papers on the following subjects: • Intervention studies targeting the promotion of mental health and featuring the Internet and/or technologies using the Internet as an underlying technology, e.g. computers, smartphone devices, tablets, sensors • Implementation and dissemination of Internet interventions • Integration of Internet interventions into existing systems of care • Descriptions of development and deployment infrastructures • Internet intervention methodology and theory papers • Internet-based epidemiology • Descriptions of new Internet-based technologies and experiments with clinical applications • Economics of internet interventions (cost-effectiveness) • Health care policy and Internet interventions • The role of culture in Internet intervention • Internet psychometrics • Ethical issues pertaining to Internet interventions and measurements • Human-computer interaction and usability research with clinical implications • Systematic reviews and meta-analysis on Internet interventions
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信