Abstract
AbstractArtificial intelligence systems (ai-systems) (e.g. machine learning, generative artificial intelligence), in healthcare and medicine, have been received with hopes of better care quality, more efficiency, lower care costs, etc. Simultaneously, these systems have been met with reservations regarding their impacts on stakeholders’ privacy, on changing power dynamics, on systemic biases, etc. Fortunately, healthcare and medicine have been guided by a multitude of ethical principles, frameworks, or approaches, which also guide the use of ai-systems in healthcare and medicine, in one form or another. Nevertheless, in this article, I argue that most of these approaches are inspired by a local isolationist view on ai-systems, here exemplified by the principlist approach. Despite positive contributions to laying out the ethical landscape of ai-systems in healthcare and medicine, such ethics approaches are too focused on a specific local healthcare and medical setting, be it a particular care relationship, a particular care organisation, or a particular society or region. By doing so, they lose sight of the global impacts ai-systems have, especially environmental impacts and related social impacts, such as increased health risks. To meet this gap, this article presents a global approach to the ethics of ai-systems in healthcare and medicine which consists of five levels of ethical impacts and analysis: individual-relational, organisational, societal, global, and historical. As such, this global approach incorporates the local isolationist view by integrating it in a wider landscape of ethical consideration so to ensure ai-systems meet the needs of everyone everywhere.
Funder
Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference69 articles.
1. Abadia Elias M, Arruda Faversani L, Aparecida Vieira Moreira J, Viapiana Masiero A, Veronez da Cunha N (2023) Artificial intelligence in health and bioethical implications: a systematic review. Rev Bioét 31(4):e3542PT. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-803420233542pt
2. Bear Don’t Walk IV O, Reyes Nieva H, Lee SS-J, Elhadad N (2022) A scoping review of ethics considerations in clinical natural language processing. JAMIA Open 5(2):ooac039. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamiaopen/ooac039
3. Belton P (2021) The computer chip industry has a dirty climate secret. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/18/semiconductor-silicon-chips-carbon-footprint-climate (Accessed 22nd of April 2024)
4. Beauchamp TL, Childress, JF (2001) Principles of biomedical ethics (5th edn). Oxford University Press, Oxford & New York
5. Bolger M, Marin D, Tofighi-Niaki A, Seelmann L (2021) ‘Green mining’ is a myth . The case for cutting EU resource consumption. European Environmental Bureau & Friends of the Earth Europe, Brussels. https://eeb.org/library/green-mining-is-a-myth/ (Accessed on 16th of April 2024)