ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Ethical Implications of Alzheimer's Disease Prediction in Asymptomatic Individuals through Artificial Intelligence.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ethical considerations of artificial intelligence in dementia research: a review of reviews.The Gerontologist · 2026Review
- RDoC-informed explainable AI as a paradigm for multilevel Alzheimer's disease diagnosis and progression prediction: a systematic review.Brain informatics · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in carotid computed tomography angiography plaque detection: Decade of progress and future perspectives.World journal of radiology · 2025Review
- Digital Tools for People Without an Alzheimer Disease or Dementia Diagnosis: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Digital and AI-Enhanced Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia: Neurocognitive Mechanisms and Clinical Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Exploring the ethical issues posed by AI and big data technologies in drug development.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
- Review
- Predicting age of onset and progression of disease in late-onset genetic neurodegenerative diseases: An ethics review and research agenda.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Review
- Attitudes towards Technology: Insights on Rarely Discussed Influences on Older Adults' Willingness to Adopt Active Assisted Living (AAL).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Fluid Biomarkers in Alzheimer's Disease and Other Neurodegenerative Disorders: Toward Integrative Diagnostic Frameworks and Tailored Treatments.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Machine learning models to detect anxiety and depression through social media: A scoping review.Computer methods and programs in biomedicine update · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biomarker-based predictive tests for subjectively asymptomatic Alzheimer's disease (AD) are utilized in research today. Novel applications of artificial intelligence (AI) promise to predict the onset of AD several years in advance without determining biomarker thresholds. Until now, little attention has been paid to the new ethical challenges that AI brings to the early diagnosis in asymptomatic individuals, beyond contributing to research purposes, when we still lack adequate treatment. The aim of this paper is to explore the ethical arguments put forward for AI aided AD prediction in subjectively asymptomatic individuals and their ethical implications. The ethical assessment is based on a systematic literature search. Thematic analysis was conducted inductively of 18 included publications. The ethical framework includes the principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. Reasons for offering predictive tests to asymptomatic individuals are the right to know, a positive balance of the risk-benefit assessment, and the opportunity for future planning. Reasons against are the lack of disease modifying treatment, the accuracy and explicability of AI aided prediction, the right not to know, and threats to social rights. We conclude that there are serious ethical concerns in offering early diagnosis to asymptomatic individuals and the issues raised by the application of AI add to the already known issues. Nevertheless, pre-symptomatic testing should only be offered on request to avoid inflicted harm. We recommend developing training for physicians in communicating AI aided prediction.
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.