Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33588803›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2021

Artificial intelligence for good health: a scoping review of the ethics literature.

Kathleen Murphy, Erica Di Ruggiero, Ross Upshur, Donald J Willison, Neha Malhotra, Jia Ce Cai, Nakul Malhotra, Vincci Lui, Jennifer Gibson

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 144 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
144citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

144 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Exploring young adult cancer survivors' perspectives on generative AI chatbots for symptom support.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Ethical and Regulatory Perception of Artificial Intelligence Among Dental Students: A Cross-Sectional Study.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

84 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Kathleen MurphyJoint Centre for Bioethics, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Suite 754, Toronto, ON, M5T 1P8, Canada.
Erica Di RuggieroOffice of Global Health Education and Training, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Room 408, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M7, Canada.
Ross UpshurDivision of Clinical Public Health, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, 155 College Street, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M7, Canada.
Donald J WillisonInstitute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public, Health Sciences Building, Health University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Suite 425, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M6, Canada.
Neha MalhotraJoint Centre for Bioethics, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Suite 754, Toronto, ON, M5T 1P8, Canada.
Jia Ce CaiJoint Centre for Bioethics, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Suite 754, Toronto, ON, M5T 1P8, Canada.
Nakul MalhotraJoint Centre for Bioethics, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Suite 754, Toronto, ON, M5T 1P8, Canada.
Vincci LuiGerstein Science Information Centre, University of Toronto, 9 King's College Circle, Toronto, ON, M7A 1A5, Canada.
Jennifer GibsonJoint Centre for Bioethics, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Suite 754, Toronto, ON, M5T 1P8, Canada. jennifer.gibson@utoronto.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) has been described as the "fourth industrial revolution" with transformative and global implications, including in healthcare, public health, and global health. AI approaches hold promise for improving health systems worldwide, as well as individual and population health outcomes. While AI may have potential for advancing health equity within and between countries, we must consider the ethical implications of its deployment in order to mitigate its potential harms, particularly for the most vulnerable. This scoping review addresses the following question: What ethical issues have been identified in relation to AI in the field of health, including from a global health perspective?

methodsEight electronic databases were searched for peer reviewed and grey literature published before April 2018 using the concepts of health, ethics, and AI, and their related terms. Records were independently screened by two reviewers and were included if they reported on AI in relation to health and ethics and were written in the English language. Data was charted on a piloted data charting form, and a descriptive and thematic analysis was performed.

resultsUpon reviewing 12,722 articles, 103 met the predetermined inclusion criteria. The literature was primarily focused on the ethics of AI in health care, particularly on carer robots, diagnostics, and precision medicine, but was largely silent on ethics of AI in public and population health. The literature highlighted a number of common ethical concerns related to privacy, trust, accountability and responsibility, and bias. Largely missing from the literature was the ethics of AI in global health, particularly in the context of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

conclusionsThe ethical issues surrounding AI in the field of health are both vast and complex. While AI holds the potential to improve health and health systems, our analysis suggests that its introduction should be approached with cautious optimism. The dearth of literature on the ethics of AI within LMICs, as well as in public health, also points to a critical need for further research into the ethical implications of AI within both global and public health, to ensure that its development and implementation is ethical for everyone, everywhere.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDelivery of Health CareCaregiversHumansMoralsPovertyArtificial intelligenceEthicsGlobal healthHealth carePublic and population health

Identifiers

PMID33588803
PMCPMC7885243

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.