Evaluating trustworthiness in AI-Based diabetic retinopathy screening: addressing transparency, consent, and privacy challenges.

IF 3.1 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Anshul Chauhan, Debarati Sarkar, Garima Singh Verma, Harsh Rastogi, Karthik Adapa, Mona Duggal
{"title":"Evaluating trustworthiness in AI-Based diabetic retinopathy screening: addressing transparency, consent, and privacy challenges.","authors":"Anshul Chauhan, Debarati Sarkar, Garima Singh Verma, Harsh Rastogi, Karthik Adapa, Mona Duggal","doi":"10.1186/s12910-025-01265-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) offers significant potential to drive advancements in healthcare; however, the development and implementation of AI models present complex ethical, legal, social, and technical challenges, as data practices often undermine regulatory frameworks in various regions worldwide. This study explores stakeholder perspectives on the development and deployment of AI algorithms for diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening, with a focus on ethical risks, data practices, governance, and emerging shortcomings in the Global South AI discourse.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fifteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with ophthalmologists, program officers, AI developers, bioethics experts, and legal professionals. Thematic analysis was guided by OECD principles for responsible AI stewardship. Interviews were analyzed using MAXQDA software to identify themes related to AI trustworthiness and ethical governance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six key themes emerged regarding the perceived trustworthiness of AI: algorithmic effectiveness, responsible data collection, ethical approval processes, explainability, implementation challenges, and accountability. Participants reported critical shortcomings in AI companies' data collection practices, including a lack of transparency, inadequate consent processes, and limited patient awareness about data ownership. These findings highlight how unchecked data collection and curation practices may reinforce data colonialism in low and middle-income healthcare systems.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Ensuring trustworthy AI requires transparent and accountable data practices, robust patient consent mechanisms, and regulatory frameworks aligned with ethical and privacy standards. Addressing these issues is vital to safeguarding patient rights, preventing data misuse, and fostering responsible AI ecosystems in the Global South.</p>","PeriodicalId":55348,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Ethics","volume":"26 1","pages":"140"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12532412/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-025-01265-7","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 (AI) offers significant potential to drive advancements in healthcare; however, the development and implementation of AI models present complex ethical, legal, social, and technical challenges, as data practices often undermine regulatory frameworks in various regions worldwide. This study explores stakeholder perspectives on the development and deployment of AI algorithms for diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening, with a focus on ethical risks, data practices, governance, and emerging shortcomings in the Global South AI discourse.

Methods: Fifteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with ophthalmologists, program officers, AI developers, bioethics experts, and legal professionals. Thematic analysis was guided by OECD principles for responsible AI stewardship. Interviews were analyzed using MAXQDA software to identify themes related to AI trustworthiness and ethical governance.

Results: Six key themes emerged regarding the perceived trustworthiness of AI: algorithmic effectiveness, responsible data collection, ethical approval processes, explainability, implementation challenges, and accountability. Participants reported critical shortcomings in AI companies' data collection practices, including a lack of transparency, inadequate consent processes, and limited patient awareness about data ownership. These findings highlight how unchecked data collection and curation practices may reinforce data colonialism in low and middle-income healthcare systems.

Conclusion: Ensuring trustworthy AI requires transparent and accountable data practices, robust patient consent mechanisms, and regulatory frameworks aligned with ethical and privacy standards. Addressing these issues is vital to safeguarding patient rights, preventing data misuse, and fostering responsible AI ecosystems in the Global South.

评估基于人工智能的糖尿病视网膜病变筛查的可信度:解决透明度、同意和隐私挑战。
背景:人工智能(AI)提供了推动医疗保健进步的巨大潜力;然而,人工智能模型的开发和实施带来了复杂的伦理、法律、社会和技术挑战,因为数据实践往往会破坏全球各个地区的监管框架。本研究探讨了利益相关者对开发和部署用于糖尿病视网膜病变(DR)筛查的人工智能算法的观点,重点关注全球南方人工智能话语中的伦理风险、数据实践、治理和新出现的缺点。方法:对眼科医生、项目官员、人工智能开发人员、生物伦理专家和法律专业人员进行了15次半结构化访谈。主题分析以经合组织负责任的人工智能管理原则为指导。使用MAXQDA软件对访谈进行分析,以确定与人工智能可信度和道德治理相关的主题。结果:关于人工智能的可信赖性,出现了六个关键主题:算法有效性、负责任的数据收集、道德审批流程、可解释性、实施挑战和问责制。与会者报告了人工智能公司数据收集实践中的重大缺陷,包括缺乏透明度、同意程序不充分以及患者对数据所有权的认识有限。这些发现突出表明,未经检查的数据收集和管理实践可能会加强中低收入医疗保健系统中的数据殖民主义。结论:确保值得信赖的人工智能需要透明和负责任的数据实践、健全的患者同意机制以及符合道德和隐私标准的监管框架。解决这些问题对于维护患者权利、防止数据滥用和在全球南方培育负责任的人工智能生态系统至关重要。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信