IF 1.7 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Bioethics Pub Date : 2025-02-09 DOI:10.1111/bioe.13398
Guillermo Lazcoz, Iñigo de Miguel
{"title":"Is more data always better? On alternative policies to mitigate bias in Artificial Intelligence health systems.","authors":"Guillermo Lazcoz, Iñigo de Miguel","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The development and implementation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) health systems represent a great power that comes with great responsibility. Their capacity to improve and transform healthcare involves inevitable risks. A major risk in this regard is the propagation of bias throughout the life cycle of the AI system, leading to harmful or discriminatory outcomes. This paper argues that the European medical device regulations may prove inadequate to address this-not only technical but also social challenge. With the advent of new regulatory remedies, it seems that the European policymakers also want to reinforce the current medical device legal framework. In this paper, we analyse different policies to mitigate bias in AI health systems included in the Artificial Intelligence Act and in the proposed European Health Data Space. As we shall see, the different remedies based on processing sensitive data for such purpose devised by the European policymakers may have very different effects both on privacy and on protection against discrimination. We find the focus on mitigation during the pre-commercialisation stages rather weak, and believe that bias control once the system has been implemented in the real world would have merited greater ambition.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-09","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.13398","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

摘要

人工智能(AI)医疗系统的开发和实施代表着一种巨大的力量,同时也伴随着巨大的责任。它们改善和改变医疗保健的能力涉及不可避免的风险。这方面的一个主要风险是在人工智能系统的整个生命周期中传播偏见,导致有害或歧视性的结果。本文认为,欧洲医疗设备法规可能不足以应对这一挑战,不仅是技术挑战,也是社会挑战。随着新监管补救措施的出现,欧洲政策制定者似乎也希望加强当前的医疗设备法律框架。在本文中,我们将分析《人工智能法》和拟议中的欧洲健康数据空间所包含的旨在减轻人工智能医疗系统偏见的不同政策。我们将看到,欧洲政策制定者基于处理敏感数据的目的而制定的不同补救措施可能会对隐私和防止歧视产生截然不同的影响。我们认为,在商业化前阶段对减轻影响的关注相当薄弱,我们认为,一旦系统在现实世界中实施,对偏差的控制就应该有更大的雄心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Is more data always better? On alternative policies to mitigate bias in Artificial Intelligence health systems.

The development and implementation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) health systems represent a great power that comes with great responsibility. Their capacity to improve and transform healthcare involves inevitable risks. A major risk in this regard is the propagation of bias throughout the life cycle of the AI system, leading to harmful or discriminatory outcomes. This paper argues that the European medical device regulations may prove inadequate to address this-not only technical but also social challenge. With the advent of new regulatory remedies, it seems that the European policymakers also want to reinforce the current medical device legal framework. In this paper, we analyse different policies to mitigate bias in AI health systems included in the Artificial Intelligence Act and in the proposed European Health Data Space. As we shall see, the different remedies based on processing sensitive data for such purpose devised by the European policymakers may have very different effects both on privacy and on protection against discrimination. We find the focus on mitigation during the pre-commercialisation stages rather weak, and believe that bias control once the system has been implemented in the real world would have merited greater ambition.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信