Artificial intelligence’s impact on healthcare is undeniable. What is less clear is whether it will be ethically justifiable. Just as we know that AI can be used to diagnose disease, predict risk, develop personalized treatment plans, monitor patients remotely, or automate triage, we also know that it can pose significant threats to patient safety and the reliability (or trustworthiness) of the healthcare sector as a whole. These ethical risks arise from (a) flaws in the evidence base of healthcare AI (epistemic concerns); (b) the potential of AI to transform fundamentally the meaning of health, the nature of healthcare, and the practice of medicine (normative concerns); and (c) the “black box” nature of the AI development pipeline, which undermines the effectiveness of existing accountability mechanisms (traceability concerns). In this chapter, we systematically map (a)–(c) to six different levels of abstraction: individual, interpersonal, group, institutional, sectoral, and societal. The aim is to help policymakers, regulators, and other high-level stakeholders delineate the scope of regulation and other “softer” governing measures for AI in healthcare. We hope that by doing so, we may enable global healthcare systems to capitalize safely and reliably on the many benefits of healthcare AI.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

The Ethics of AI in Healthcare: An Updated Mapping Review

  • Jessica Morley,
  • Luciano Floridi

摘要

Artificial intelligence’s impact on healthcare is undeniable. What is less clear is whether it will be ethically justifiable. Just as we know that AI can be used to diagnose disease, predict risk, develop personalized treatment plans, monitor patients remotely, or automate triage, we also know that it can pose significant threats to patient safety and the reliability (or trustworthiness) of the healthcare sector as a whole. These ethical risks arise from (a) flaws in the evidence base of healthcare AI (epistemic concerns); (b) the potential of AI to transform fundamentally the meaning of health, the nature of healthcare, and the practice of medicine (normative concerns); and (c) the “black box” nature of the AI development pipeline, which undermines the effectiveness of existing accountability mechanisms (traceability concerns). In this chapter, we systematically map (a)–(c) to six different levels of abstraction: individual, interpersonal, group, institutional, sectoral, and societal. The aim is to help policymakers, regulators, and other high-level stakeholders delineate the scope of regulation and other “softer” governing measures for AI in healthcare. We hope that by doing so, we may enable global healthcare systems to capitalize safely and reliably on the many benefits of healthcare AI.