ArticleCMAJ open
Ethical concerns around use of artificial intelligence in health care research from the perspective of patients with meningioma, caregivers and health care providers: a qualitative study.
Article in CMAJ open. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
44 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Patient Concerns Regarding Artificial Intelligence Applications in Health Care: Systematic Review and Meta-Synthesis Based on Social Ecological Theory.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Precision cancer medicine and the doctor-patient relationship: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Pooled it
- Stakeholder Perspectives of Clinical Artificial Intelligence Implementation: Systematic Review of Qualitative Evidence.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- Psychometric Evaluation of the Artificial Intelligence Perception Scale for Cancer Patients: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- Review
- A maturity model framework for federated networks of trusted research environments.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Modern Medicine: Clinical Applications, Economic Implications, and Ethical Considerations.Current pharmaceutical design · 2026Review
- Continuous assurance for AI-driven clinical decision support systems.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Review
- Predicting weaning failure from invasive mechanical ventilation: The promise and pitfalls of clinical prediction scores.World journal of critical care medicine · 2025Review
- Article
- Evaluating accountability, transparency, and bias in AI-assisted healthcare decision- making: a qualitative study of healthcare professionals' perspectives in the UK.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Patients' Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence Acceptance, Challenges, and Use in Medical Care: Qualitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Leveraging artificial intelligence to promote COVID-19 appropriate behaviour in a healthcare institution from north India: A feasibility study.The Indian journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Acceptance and Adoption of Artificial Intelligence Among Cancer Survivors Seeking Information: A Literature Review.Journal of patient experience · 2025Article
- A Review of the Utility and Limitations of Artificial Intelligence in Retinal Disorders and Pediatric Ophthalmology.Cureus · 2024Review
- Frameworks for procurement, integration, monitoring, and evaluation of artificial intelligence tools in clinical settings: A systematic review.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Declaration of Computational Neurosurgery.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024Article
- Patient Perspectives on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care: A Scoping Review.Journal of patient-centered research and reviews · 2024Article
- Article
- Patients' Views on AI for Risk Prediction in Shared Decision-Making for Knee Replacement Surgery: Qualitative Interview Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs artificial intelligence (AI) approaches in research increase and AI becomes more integrated into medicine, there is a need to understand perspectives from members of the Canadian public and medical community. The aim of this project was to investigate current perspectives on ethical issues surrounding AI in health care.
methodsIn this qualitative study, adult patients with meningioma and their caregivers were recruited consecutively (August 2018-February 2019) from a neurosurgical clinic in Toronto. Health care providers caring for these patients were recruited through snowball sampling. Based on a nonsystematic literature search, we constructed 3 vignettes that sought participants' views on hypothetical issues surrounding potential AI applications in health care. The vignettes were presented to participants in interviews, which lasted 15-45 minutes. Responses were transcribed and coded for concepts, frequency of response types and larger concepts emerging from the interview.
resultsWe interviewed 30 participants: 18 patients, 7 caregivers and 5 health care providers. For each question, a variable number of responses were recorded. The majority of participants endorsed nonconsented use of health data but advocated for disclosure and transparency. Few patients and caregivers felt that allocation of health resources should be done via computerized output, and a majority stated that it was inappropriate to delegate such decisions to a computer. Almost all participants felt that selling health data should be prohibited, and a minority stated that less privacy is acceptable for the goal of improving health. Certain caveats were identified, including the desire for deidentification of data and use within trusted institutions.
interpretationIn this preliminary study, patients and caregivers reported a mixture of hopefulness and concern around the use of AI in health care research, whereas providers were generally more skeptical. These findings provide a point of departure for institutions adopting health AI solutions to consider the ethical implications of this work by understanding stakeholders' perspectives.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.