Artificial Intelligence-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems in Geriatrics : An Ethical Analysis
Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved..
OBJECTIVES: To provide an ethical analysis of the implications of the usage of artificial intelligence-supported clinical decision support systems (AI-CDSS) in geriatrics.
DESIGN: Ethical analysis based on the normative arguments regarding the use of AI-CDSS in geriatrics using a principle-based ethical framework.
SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Normative arguments identified in 29 articles on AI-CDSS in geriatrics.
METHODS: Our analysis is based on a literature search that was done to determine ethical arguments that are currently discussed regarding AI-CDSS. The relevant articles were subjected to a detailed qualitative analysis regarding the ethical considerations Supplementary Datamentioned therein. We then discussed the identified arguments within the frame of the 4 principles of medical ethics according to Beauchamp and Childress and with respect to the needs of frail older adults.
RESULTS: We found a total of 5089 articles; 29 articles met the inclusion criteria and were subsequently subjected to a detailed qualitative analysis. We could not identify any systematic analysis of the ethical implications of AI-CDSS in geriatrics. The ethical considerations are very unsystematic and scattered, and the existing literature has a predominantly technical focus emphasizing the technology's utility. In an extensive ethical analysis, we systematically discuss the ethical implications of the usage of AI-CDSS in geriatrics.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: AI-CDSS in geriatrics can be a great asset, especially when dealing with patients with cognitive disorders; however, from an ethical perspective, we see the need for further research. By using AI-CDSS, older patients' values and beliefs might be overlooked, and the quality of the doctor-patient relationship might be altered, endangering compliance to the 4 ethical principles of Beauchamp and Childress.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2023 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2023 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:24 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Journal of the American Medical Directors Association - 24(2023), 9 vom: 24. Sept., Seite 1271-1276.e4 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Skuban-Eiseler, Tobias [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Adults |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 05.09.2023 Date Revised 07.09.2023 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.jamda.2023.06.008 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM35954150X |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM35954150X | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226081110.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.jamda.2023.06.008 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1198.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM35954150X | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)37453451 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)S1525-8610(23)00555-8 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Skuban-Eiseler, Tobias |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Artificial Intelligence-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems in Geriatrics |b An Ethical Analysis |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 05.09.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 07.09.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. | ||
| 520 | |a OBJECTIVES: To provide an ethical analysis of the implications of the usage of artificial intelligence-supported clinical decision support systems (AI-CDSS) in geriatrics | ||
| 520 | |a DESIGN: Ethical analysis based on the normative arguments regarding the use of AI-CDSS in geriatrics using a principle-based ethical framework | ||
| 520 | |a SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Normative arguments identified in 29 articles on AI-CDSS in geriatrics | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: Our analysis is based on a literature search that was done to determine ethical arguments that are currently discussed regarding AI-CDSS. The relevant articles were subjected to a detailed qualitative analysis regarding the ethical considerations Supplementary Datamentioned therein. We then discussed the identified arguments within the frame of the 4 principles of medical ethics according to Beauchamp and Childress and with respect to the needs of frail older adults | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: We found a total of 5089 articles; 29 articles met the inclusion criteria and were subsequently subjected to a detailed qualitative analysis. We could not identify any systematic analysis of the ethical implications of AI-CDSS in geriatrics. The ethical considerations are very unsystematic and scattered, and the existing literature has a predominantly technical focus emphasizing the technology's utility. In an extensive ethical analysis, we systematically discuss the ethical implications of the usage of AI-CDSS in geriatrics | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: AI-CDSS in geriatrics can be a great asset, especially when dealing with patients with cognitive disorders; however, from an ethical perspective, we see the need for further research. By using AI-CDSS, older patients' values and beliefs might be overlooked, and the quality of the doctor-patient relationship might be altered, endangering compliance to the 4 ethical principles of Beauchamp and Childress | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Geriatrics | |
| 650 | 4 | |a adults | |
| 650 | 4 | |a aged | |
| 650 | 4 | |a artificial intelligence | |
| 650 | 4 | |a clinical decision support systems | |
| 650 | 4 | |a clinical ethics | |
| 650 | 4 | |a elderly | |
| 650 | 4 | |a older | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Orzechowski, Marcin |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Denkinger, Michael |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kocar, Thomas Derya |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Leinert, Christoph |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Steger, Florian |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of the American Medical Directors Association |d 2000 |g 24(2023), 9 vom: 24. Sept., Seite 1271-1276.e4 |w (DE-627)NLM125714041 |x 1538-9375 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:24 |g year:2023 |g number:9 |g day:24 |g month:09 |g pages:1271-1276.e4 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2023.06.008 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 24 |j 2023 |e 9 |b 24 |c 09 |h 1271-1276.e4 | ||