Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33717318›Full record

ArticleAsian bioethics review2019

AI-Assisted Decision-making in Healthcare: The Application of an Ethics Framework for Big Data in Health and Research.

Tamra Lysaght, Hannah Yeefen Lim, Vicki Xafis, Kee Yuan Ngiam

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Asian bioethics review, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

68 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. A neuromuscular clinician's primer on machine learning.Journal of neuromuscular diseases · 2026
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

8 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

4 authors.

Tamra LysaghtCentre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-7125-4206
Hannah Yeefen LimNanyang Business School, Nanyang Technology University, Singapore.
Vicki XafisCentre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-5104-9686
Kee Yuan NgiamDivision of General Surgery (Thyroid & Endocrine Surgery), Department of Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-5676-2520

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is set to transform healthcare. Key ethical issues to emerge with this transformation encompass the accountability and transparency of the decisions made by AI-based systems, the potential for group harms arising from algorithmic bias and the professional roles and integrity of clinicians. These concerns must be balanced against the imperatives of generating public benefit with more efficient healthcare systems from the vastly higher and accurate computational power of AI. In weighing up these issues, this paper applies the deliberative balancing approach of the

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceBig dataBioethicsClinical decision-making support systemsProfessional governance

Identifiers

PMID33717318
PMCPMC7747260

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.