Should Artificial Intelligence be used to support clinical ethical decision-making? A systematic review of reasons

被引:15
|
作者
Benzinger, Lasse [1 ]
Ursin, Frank [1 ]
Balke, Wolf-Tilo [2 ]
Kacprowski, Tim [3 ,4 ,5 ]
Salloch, Sabine [1 ]
机构
[1] Hannover Med Sch MHH, Inst Ethics Hist & Philosophy Med, Carl Neuberg Str 1, D-30625 Hannover, Germany
[2] TU Braunschweig, Inst Informat Syst, Braunschweig, Germany
[3] Tech Univ Carolo Wilhelmina Braunschweig, Peter L Reichertz Inst Med Informat, Div Data Sci Biomed, Braunschweig, Germany
[4] Hannover Med Sch, Braunschweig, Germany
[5] TU Braunschweig, Braunschweig Integrated Ctr Syst Biol BRICS, Braunschweig, Germany
关键词
Ethics; Clinical; Decision-making; artificial intelligence; Decision support systems; clinical; Systematic review; PATIENT PREFERENCE PREDICTOR; ALGORITHMIC ETHICS; CARE; CLASSIFICATION; LANDSCAPE; ISSUES;
D O I
10.1186/s12910-023-00929-6
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background Healthcare providers have to make ethically complex clinical decisions which may be a source of stress. Researchers have recently introduced Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based applications to assist in clinical ethical decisionmaking. However, the use of such tools is controversial. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the reasons given in the academic literature for and against their use. Methods PubMed, Web of Science, Philpapers.org and Google Scholar were searched for all relevant publications. The resulting set of publications was title and abstract screened according to defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, resulting in 44 papers whose full texts were analysed using the Kuckartz method of qualitative text analysis. Results Artificial Intelligence might increase patient autonomy by improving the accuracy of predictions and allowing patients to receive their preferred treatment. It is thought to increase beneficence by providing reliable information, thereby, supporting surrogate decision-making. Some authors fear that reducing ethical decision-making to statistical correlations may limit autonomy. Others argue that AI may not be able to replicate the process of ethical deliberation because it lacks human characteristics. Concerns have been raised about issues of justice, as AI may replicate existing biases in the decision-making process. Conclusions The prospective benefits of using AI in clinical ethical decision-making are manifold, but its development and use should be undertaken carefully to avoid ethical pitfalls. Several issues that are central to the discussion of Clinical Decision Support Systems, such as justice, explicability or human-machine interaction, have been neglected in the debate on AI for clinical ethics so far. Trial registration This review is registered at Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/wvcs9).
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Review of Artificial Intelligence Applied in Decision-Making Processes in Agricultural Public Policy
    Sanchez, Juan M.
    Rodriguez, Juan P.
    Espitia, Helbert E.
    PROCESSES, 2020, 8 (11) : 1 - 23
  • [32] A solution looking for problems? A systematic literature review of the rationalizing influence of artificial intelligence on decision-making in innovation management
    Pietronudo, Maria Cristina
    Croidieu, Gregoire
    Schiavone, Francesco
    TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, 2022, 182
  • [33] Artificial intelligence and decision making problems: The need for an ethical context
    Luis Verdegay, Jose
    Teresa Lamata, Ma
    Pelta, David
    Cruz, Carlos
    SUMA DE NEGOCIOS, 2021, 12 (27) : 104 - 114
  • [34] Integrating intuition and artificial intelligence in organizational decision-making
    Vincent, Vinod U.
    BUSINESS HORIZONS, 2021, 64 (04) : 425 - 438
  • [35] Organizational Decision-Making Structures in the Age of Artificial Intelligence
    Shrestha, Yash Raj
    Ben-Menahem, Shiko M.
    von Krogh, Georg
    CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW, 2019, 61 (04) : 66 - 83
  • [36] Use of Artificial Intelligence tools in supporting decision-making in hospital management
    Alves, Mauricio
    Seringa, Joana
    Silvestre, Tatiana
    Magalhaes, Teresa
    BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2024, 24 (01)
  • [37] Artificial intelligence for decision support in surgical oncology - a systematic review
    Wagner, Martin
    Schulze, Andre
    Haselbeck-Kobler, Michael
    Probst, Pascal
    Brandenburg, Johanna M.
    Kalkum, Eva
    Majlesara, Ali
    Ramouz, Ali
    Klotz, Rosa
    Nickel, Felix
    Marz, Keno
    Bodenstedt, Sebastian
    Dugas, Martin
    Maier-Hein, Lena
    Mehrabi, Arianeb
    Speidel, Stefanie
    Buchler, Markus W.
    Mueller-Stich, Beat Peter
    ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SURGERY, 2022, 2 (03): : 159 - 172
  • [38] Interventions Encouraging the Use of Systematic Reviews in Clinical Decision-Making: A Systematic Review
    Laure Perrier
    Kelly Mrklas
    Sasha Shepperd
    Maureen Dobbins
    K. Ann McKibbon
    Sharon E. Straus
    Journal of General Internal Medicine, 2011, 26 : 419 - 426
  • [39] Decision aids to support decision-making in dementia care: a systematic review
    Davies, Nathan
    Schiowitz, Brooke
    Rait, Greta
    Vickerstaff, Victoria
    Sampson, Elizabeth L.
    INTERNATIONAL PSYCHOGERIATRICS, 2019, 31 (10) : 1403 - 1419
  • [40] Artificial intelligence in intensive care: moving towards clinical decision support systems
    Montomoli, Jonathan
    Hilty, Matthias P.
    Ince, Can
    MINERVA ANESTESIOLOGICA, 2022, 88 (12) : 1066 - 1072