fosterfixx

[fosterfixx]

The Ethical Use of AI in Healthcare and Research

As AI technology continues to enter the health care space and transform the way we live our lives, it is creating ethical dilemmas that require a thoughtful response. The AMA Journal of Ethics’ new theme issue, The Ethical Use of AI in Healthcare and Research, aims to address these pressing concerns and facilitate dialogue between physicians, patients, and other stakeholders on the implications of the integration of this advanced technology.

Many of the core ethical issues associated with the use of AI in health care revolve around privacy and security, trust, accountability and responsibility, and bias. All of these concerns are valid and present real-world risks that must be taken into consideration in the development, implementation, and evaluation of AI technologies in medical practice.

While these common ethical questions are vital, there are other concerns that have been largely omitted from the discussion thus far. A primary concern is that of the impact on global and public health as AI is incorporated tech ogle into healthcare systems. In particular, there is the risk of increasing inequalities among populations as AI is used to support primarily high-income and wealthy countries or regions while undermining the 17 Sustainable Development Goals established by all UN member states that focus on global solidarity and a pledge to leave no one behind.

There is also the question of how physician autonomy and liability will be affected by the use of AI in clinical practice. The Hippocratic Oath lays out the principle of first doing no harm, and it is likely that AI in medicine will put this oath to the test, especially when deciding upon a course of treatment for each individual patient. If an algorithm fails to make the correct diagnosis or recommends a medication that is harmful, it can damage a physician’s reputation and lead to distrust of the healthcare system as a whole.

The oath also calls for physicians to act with integrity, and some experts worry that if a physician is liable for actions facilitated by an AI system, they may be less likely to voluntarily adopt these tools in their practices or be comfortable overriding the system’s decision if the potential consequences of doing so could be deemed to be malpractice. Bruce believes that if physicians are held liable for their AI decisions, it will slow the adoption of these tools and hinder the clinical integration of AI in health care.

A final concern technology website that will require a thorough examination of the ethical implications of AI is its potential to create new forms of bias as it is developed and deployed. While this is not a unique concern to be found in other areas of science, the potential for biased algorithms created by the training of data sets and the human factor that influences the programming of these systems makes it particularly important to examine carefully. The issue of bias should be addressed by building AI technology to reflect current ethical healthcare standards, taking a multidisciplinary approach to its development and deployment, and encouraging end users to apply discretion when using AI tools.