The right to a second opinion on Artificial Intelligence diagnosis—Remedying the inadequacy of a risk‐based regulation.
In this paper, we argue that patients who are subjects of Artificial Intelligence (AI)‐supported diagnosis and treatment planning should have a right to a second opinion, but also that this right should not necessarily be construed as a right to a physician opinion. The right to a second opinion cou...
| Publicado en: | Bioethics Vol. 37; no. 3; pp. 303 - 312 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Mar2023
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=161896714&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 161896714 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 02699702 6PJ jtl: Bioethics issn: 02699702 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Mar2023 vid: 37 iid: 3 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell artinfo: ui: 161896714 10.1111/bioe.13124 ppf: 303 ppct: 9 formats: tig: atl: The right to a second opinion on Artificial Intelligence diagnosis—Remedying the inadequacy of a risk‐based regulation. aug: au: Ploug, Thomas Holm, Søren affil: Centre of Applied Ethics and Philosophy of Science, Department of Communication and Psychology, Aalborg University, Copenhagen, Denmark Centre for Social Ethics and Policy, School of Law, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK Centre for Medical Ethics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway su: Artificial intelligence Patients' rights Physicians Rules Risk assessment Medical referrals sug: subj: Artificial intelligence Patients' rights Physicians Offices of Physicians (except Mental Health Specialists) Offices of physicians Rules Risk assessment Medical referrals keyword: AI regulation AI rights AI risks Artificial Intelligence second opinion AI regulation AI rights AI risks Artificial Intelligence second opinion ab: In this paper, we argue that patients who are subjects of Artificial Intelligence (AI)‐supported diagnosis and treatment planning should have a right to a second opinion, but also that this right should not necessarily be construed as a right to a physician opinion. The right to a second opinion could potentially be satisfied by another independent AI system. Our considerations on the right to second opinion are embedded in the wider debate on different approaches to the regulation of AI, and we conclude the article by providing a number of reasons for preferring a rights‐based approach over a risk‐based approach. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|