C. Edwards , A. Murphy , A. Singh , S. Daniel , C. Chamunyonga
{"title":"在人工智能辅助决策中,患者结果在塑造道德责任方面的作用","authors":"C. Edwards , A. Murphy , A. Singh , S. Daniel , C. Chamunyonga","doi":"10.1016/j.radi.2025.102948","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Integrating decision support mechanisms utilising artificial intelligence (AI) into medical radiation practice introduces unique challenges to accountability for patient care outcomes. AI systems, often seen as “black boxes,” can obscure decision-making processes, raising concerns about practitioner responsibility, especially in adverse outcomes. This study examines how medical radiation practitioners perceive and attribute moral responsibility when interacting with AI-assisted decision-making tools.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A cross-sectional online survey was conducted from September to December 2024, targeting international medical radiation practitioners. Participants were randomly assigned one of four profession-specific scenarios involving AI recommendations and patient outcomes. A 5-point Likert scale assessed the practitioner's perceptions of moral responsibility, and the responses were analysed using descriptive statistics, Kruskal–Wallis tests, and ordinal regression. Demographic and contextual factors were also evaluated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>649 radiographers, radiation therapists, nuclear medicine scientists, and sonographers provided complete responses. Most participants (49.8 %) had experience using AI in their current roles. Practitioners assigned higher moral responsibility to themselves in positive patient outcomes compared to negative ones (χ<sup>2</sup>(1) = 18.98, p < 0.001). Prior knowledge of AI ethics and professional discipline significantly influenced responsibility ratings. While practitioners generally accepted responsibility, 33 % also attributed shared responsibility to AI developers and institutions.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Patient outcomes significantly influence perceptions of moral responsibility, with a shift toward shared accountability in adverse scenarios. Prior knowledge of AI ethics is crucial in shaping these perceptions, highlighting the need for targeted education.</div></div><div><h3>Implications for practice</h3><div>Understanding practitioner perceptions of accountability is critical for developing ethical frameworks, training programs, and shared responsibility models that ensure the safe integration of AI into clinical practice. Robust regulatory structures are necessary to address the unique challenges of AI-assisted decision-making.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47416,"journal":{"name":"Radiography","volume":"31 3","pages":"Article 102948"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The role of patient outcomes in shaping moral responsibility in AI-supported decision making\",\"authors\":\"C. Edwards , A. Murphy , A. Singh , S. Daniel , C. Chamunyonga\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.radi.2025.102948\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Integrating decision support mechanisms utilising artificial intelligence (AI) into medical radiation practice introduces unique challenges to accountability for patient care outcomes. AI systems, often seen as “black boxes,” can obscure decision-making processes, raising concerns about practitioner responsibility, especially in adverse outcomes. This study examines how medical radiation practitioners perceive and attribute moral responsibility when interacting with AI-assisted decision-making tools.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A cross-sectional online survey was conducted from September to December 2024, targeting international medical radiation practitioners. Participants were randomly assigned one of four profession-specific scenarios involving AI recommendations and patient outcomes. A 5-point Likert scale assessed the practitioner's perceptions of moral responsibility, and the responses were analysed using descriptive statistics, Kruskal–Wallis tests, and ordinal regression. Demographic and contextual factors were also evaluated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>649 radiographers, radiation therapists, nuclear medicine scientists, and sonographers provided complete responses. Most participants (49.8 %) had experience using AI in their current roles. Practitioners assigned higher moral responsibility to themselves in positive patient outcomes compared to negative ones (χ<sup>2</sup>(1) = 18.98, p < 0.001). Prior knowledge of AI ethics and professional discipline significantly influenced responsibility ratings. While practitioners generally accepted responsibility, 33 % also attributed shared responsibility to AI developers and institutions.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Patient outcomes significantly influence perceptions of moral responsibility, with a shift toward shared accountability in adverse scenarios. Prior knowledge of AI ethics is crucial in shaping these perceptions, highlighting the need for targeted education.</div></div><div><h3>Implications for practice</h3><div>Understanding practitioner perceptions of accountability is critical for developing ethical frameworks, training programs, and shared responsibility models that ensure the safe integration of AI into clinical practice. Robust regulatory structures are necessary to address the unique challenges of AI-assisted decision-making.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47416,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiography\",\"volume\":\"31 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 102948\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078817425000926\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078817425000926","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
The role of patient outcomes in shaping moral responsibility in AI-supported decision making
Introduction
Integrating decision support mechanisms utilising artificial intelligence (AI) into medical radiation practice introduces unique challenges to accountability for patient care outcomes. AI systems, often seen as “black boxes,” can obscure decision-making processes, raising concerns about practitioner responsibility, especially in adverse outcomes. This study examines how medical radiation practitioners perceive and attribute moral responsibility when interacting with AI-assisted decision-making tools.
Methods
A cross-sectional online survey was conducted from September to December 2024, targeting international medical radiation practitioners. Participants were randomly assigned one of four profession-specific scenarios involving AI recommendations and patient outcomes. A 5-point Likert scale assessed the practitioner's perceptions of moral responsibility, and the responses were analysed using descriptive statistics, Kruskal–Wallis tests, and ordinal regression. Demographic and contextual factors were also evaluated.
Results
649 radiographers, radiation therapists, nuclear medicine scientists, and sonographers provided complete responses. Most participants (49.8 %) had experience using AI in their current roles. Practitioners assigned higher moral responsibility to themselves in positive patient outcomes compared to negative ones (χ2(1) = 18.98, p < 0.001). Prior knowledge of AI ethics and professional discipline significantly influenced responsibility ratings. While practitioners generally accepted responsibility, 33 % also attributed shared responsibility to AI developers and institutions.
Conclusion
Patient outcomes significantly influence perceptions of moral responsibility, with a shift toward shared accountability in adverse scenarios. Prior knowledge of AI ethics is crucial in shaping these perceptions, highlighting the need for targeted education.
Implications for practice
Understanding practitioner perceptions of accountability is critical for developing ethical frameworks, training programs, and shared responsibility models that ensure the safe integration of AI into clinical practice. Robust regulatory structures are necessary to address the unique challenges of AI-assisted decision-making.
RadiographyRADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
34.60%
发文量
169
审稿时长
63 days
期刊介绍:
Radiography is an International, English language, peer-reviewed journal of diagnostic imaging and radiation therapy. Radiography is the official professional journal of the College of Radiographers and is published quarterly. Radiography aims to publish the highest quality material, both clinical and scientific, on all aspects of diagnostic imaging and radiation therapy and oncology.