AI-assisted consent in paediatric medicine: ethical implications of using large language models to support decision-making.

IF 3.4 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Jemima Winifred Allen, Brian David Earp, Dominic Wilkinson
{"title":"AI-assisted consent in paediatric medicine: ethical implications of using large language models to support decision-making.","authors":"Jemima Winifred Allen, Brian David Earp, Dominic Wilkinson","doi":"10.1136/jme-2024-110624","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Obtaining informed consent in paediatrics is an essential yet ethically complex aspect of clinical practice. Children have varying levels of autonomy and understanding based on their age and developmental maturity, with parents traditionally playing a central role in decision-making. However, there is increasing recognition of children's evolving capacities and their right to be involved in care decisions, raising questions about facilitating meaningful consent, or at least assent, in complex medical situations.Large language models (LLMs) may offer a partial solution to these challenges. These generative artificial intelligence (AI) systems can provide interactive, age-appropriate explanations of medical procedures, risks and outcomes tailored to each child's comprehension level. LLMs could be designed to adapt their responses to young patients' cognitive and emotional needs while supporting parents with clear, accessible medical information.This paper examines the ethical implications of using LLMs in paediatric consent, focusing on balancing autonomy promotion with protecting children's best interests. We explore how LLMs could be used to empower children to express preferences, mediate family disputes and facilitate informed consent. However, important concerns arise: Can LLMs adequately support developing autonomy? Might they exert undue influence or worsen conflicts between family members and healthcare providers?We conclude that while LLMs could enhance paediatric consent processes with appropriate safeguards and careful integration into clinical practice, their implementation must be approached cautiously. These systems should complement rather than replace the essential human elements of empathy, judgement and trust in paediatric consent.</p>","PeriodicalId":16317,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Ethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2024-110624","RegionNum":2,"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

Obtaining informed consent in paediatrics is an essential yet ethically complex aspect of clinical practice. Children have varying levels of autonomy and understanding based on their age and developmental maturity, with parents traditionally playing a central role in decision-making. However, there is increasing recognition of children's evolving capacities and their right to be involved in care decisions, raising questions about facilitating meaningful consent, or at least assent, in complex medical situations.Large language models (LLMs) may offer a partial solution to these challenges. These generative artificial intelligence (AI) systems can provide interactive, age-appropriate explanations of medical procedures, risks and outcomes tailored to each child's comprehension level. LLMs could be designed to adapt their responses to young patients' cognitive and emotional needs while supporting parents with clear, accessible medical information.This paper examines the ethical implications of using LLMs in paediatric consent, focusing on balancing autonomy promotion with protecting children's best interests. We explore how LLMs could be used to empower children to express preferences, mediate family disputes and facilitate informed consent. However, important concerns arise: Can LLMs adequately support developing autonomy? Might they exert undue influence or worsen conflicts between family members and healthcare providers?We conclude that while LLMs could enhance paediatric consent processes with appropriate safeguards and careful integration into clinical practice, their implementation must be approached cautiously. These systems should complement rather than replace the essential human elements of empathy, judgement and trust in paediatric consent.

儿科医学中人工智能辅助同意:使用大型语言模型支持决策的伦理影响。
在儿科获得知情同意是临床实践的一个重要但伦理上复杂的方面。根据儿童的年龄和发育成熟度,他们有不同程度的自主权和理解力,传统上父母在决策中起着核心作用。然而,人们越来越认识到儿童不断发展的能力和他们参与护理决定的权利,这就提出了在复杂的医疗情况下如何促进有意义的同意,或至少是同意的问题。大型语言模型(llm)可能为这些挑战提供部分解决方案。这些生成式人工智能(AI)系统可以根据每个孩子的理解水平,提供适合他们年龄的医疗程序、风险和结果的交互式解释。法学硕士可以根据年轻患者的认知和情感需求进行设计,同时为父母提供清晰、可获取的医疗信息。本文探讨了在儿科同意中使用法学硕士的伦理含义,重点是平衡自主促进与保护儿童的最大利益。我们探讨了法学硕士如何被用来赋予儿童表达偏好、调解家庭纠纷和促进知情同意的权力。然而,重要的问题出现了:法学硕士能否充分支持自主发展?他们是否会施加不当影响或加剧家庭成员与医疗服务提供者之间的冲突?我们的结论是,虽然法学硕士可以通过适当的保障措施和仔细整合到临床实践中来加强儿科同意过程,但它们的实施必须谨慎进行。这些系统应该补充而不是取代在儿科同意方面的同情、判断和信任等基本的人类因素。
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
Journal of Medical Ethics
Journal of Medical Ethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.80%
发文量
164
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Ethics is a leading international journal that reflects the whole field of medical ethics. The journal seeks to promote ethical reflection and conduct in scientific research and medical practice. It features articles on various ethical aspects of health care relevant to health care professionals, members of clinical ethics committees, medical ethics professionals, researchers and bioscientists, policy makers and patients. Subscribers to the Journal of Medical Ethics also receive Medical Humanities journal at no extra cost. JME is the official journal of the Institute of Medical Ethics.
×
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