Assisting, Replicating, or Autonomously Acting? An Ethical Framework for Integrating AI Tools and Technologies in Healthcare.

IF 1.7 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Bioethics Pub Date : 2025-07-18 DOI:10.1111/bioe.70019
Aasim I Padela, Rwan Hayek, Aliya Tabassum, Fabrice Jotterand, Junaid Qadir
{"title":"Assisting, Replicating, or Autonomously Acting? An Ethical Framework for Integrating AI Tools and Technologies in Healthcare.","authors":"Aasim I Padela, Rwan Hayek, Aliya Tabassum, Fabrice Jotterand, Junaid Qadir","doi":"10.1111/bioe.70019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Artificial intelligence (AI)-based technologies are increasingly being utilized, tested, and integrated into conventional healthcare delivery. Technological opportunities, ranging from machine-learning-based data analysis tools to large language model-based virtual healthcare assistants, offer significant potential to enhance healthcare access and improve outcomes. Researchers have discussed potential benefits, including improved resource allocation, diagnostic accuracy, and patient outcomes from greater AI integration in healthcare, and also have voiced concerns around data privacy, algorithmic bias, and diffused accountability. This paper adds to the literature by proposing an ethical framework that allows for both describing and normatively evaluating AI-mediated healthcare delivery based on its potential impact on human-centered patient care. Drawing upon Pelligrino's notions of the patient-doctor relationship, we propose a framework with two axes, one related to spectrum of patient engagement and the other related to the clinician's role, through which to assess the use of AI in healthcare. Technologies and tools that have minimal to no interaction with patients and primarily assist physicians in making clinical decisions tend to have the least ethical challenges. On the other hand, those that are fully patient-facing and work in parallel with doctors or autonomously in therapeutic or decisional roles are the most controversial, as they risk making healthcare less human-centric. As we advance toward more pervasive integration of AI in healthcare, our framework can facilitate upfront design and downstream implementation-related decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.70019","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI)-based technologies are increasingly being utilized, tested, and integrated into conventional healthcare delivery. Technological opportunities, ranging from machine-learning-based data analysis tools to large language model-based virtual healthcare assistants, offer significant potential to enhance healthcare access and improve outcomes. Researchers have discussed potential benefits, including improved resource allocation, diagnostic accuracy, and patient outcomes from greater AI integration in healthcare, and also have voiced concerns around data privacy, algorithmic bias, and diffused accountability. This paper adds to the literature by proposing an ethical framework that allows for both describing and normatively evaluating AI-mediated healthcare delivery based on its potential impact on human-centered patient care. Drawing upon Pelligrino's notions of the patient-doctor relationship, we propose a framework with two axes, one related to spectrum of patient engagement and the other related to the clinician's role, through which to assess the use of AI in healthcare. Technologies and tools that have minimal to no interaction with patients and primarily assist physicians in making clinical decisions tend to have the least ethical challenges. On the other hand, those that are fully patient-facing and work in parallel with doctors or autonomously in therapeutic or decisional roles are the most controversial, as they risk making healthcare less human-centric. As we advance toward more pervasive integration of AI in healthcare, our framework can facilitate upfront design and downstream implementation-related decisions.

协助,复制,还是自主行动?在医疗保健中集成人工智能工具和技术的伦理框架。
基于人工智能(AI)的技术正越来越多地被利用、测试并集成到传统的医疗保健服务中。技术机遇,从基于机器学习的数据分析工具到基于大型语言模型的虚拟医疗保健助手,为增强医疗保健访问和改善结果提供了巨大的潜力。研究人员讨论了人工智能在医疗保健领域的更大整合带来的潜在好处,包括改善资源分配、诊断准确性和患者预后,同时也表达了对数据隐私、算法偏见和分散问责制的担忧。本文通过提出一个伦理框架来补充文献,该框架允许基于人工智能对以人为中心的患者护理的潜在影响来描述和规范评估人工智能介导的医疗保健服务。借鉴Pelligrino关于医患关系的概念,我们提出了一个有两个轴的框架,一个与患者参与的范围有关,另一个与临床医生的角色有关,通过它来评估人工智能在医疗保健中的使用。与患者互动最少甚至没有互动的技术和工具,主要是帮助医生做出临床决策,往往面临的伦理挑战最少。另一方面,那些完全面向患者、与医生并行工作或自主担任治疗或决策角色的人工智能是最具争议的,因为它们有可能使医疗保健不那么以人为中心。随着人工智能在医疗保健领域的集成越来越普遍,我们的框架可以促进前期设计和下游实施相关决策。
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
Bioethics
Bioethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
9.10%
发文量
127
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: As medical technology continues to develop, the subject of bioethics has an ever increasing practical relevance for all those working in philosophy, medicine, law, sociology, public policy, education and related fields. Bioethics provides a forum for well-argued articles on the ethical questions raised by current issues such as: international collaborative clinical research in developing countries; public health; infectious disease; AIDS; managed care; genomics and stem cell research. These questions are considered in relation to concrete ethical, legal and policy problems, or in terms of the fundamental concepts, principles and theories used in discussions of such problems. Bioethics also features regular Background Briefings on important current debates in the field. These feature articles provide excellent material for bioethics scholars, teachers and students alike.
×
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