ArticleScience and engineering ethics2021
Ethics-Based Auditing of Automated Decision-Making Systems: Nature, Scope, and Limitations.
Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- An automated decision-making procedure for ranking and selecting species in biodiversity projects.npj biodiversity · 2026Article
- Development of prediction models for perioperative opioid needs in laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients: A machine-learning approach.Surgery open science · 2026Article
- Liability in Telesurgery: Navigating Legal, Ethical, and Cross-Border Challenges in the Era of Global Surgical Care.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2026Review
- Frontier AI developers need an internal audit function.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2025Article
- Simplifying software compliance: AI technologies in drafting technical documentation for the AI Act.Empirical software engineering · 2025Article
- Conceptualizing Automated Decision-Making in Organizational Contexts.Philosophy & technology · 2024Article
- Modelling the mass adoption potential of food waste composting among rural Chinese farmers.Heliyon · 2023Article
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence Model Documentation in Translational Science: Scoping Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Operationalising AI governance through ethics-based auditing: an industry case study.AI and ethics · 2023Article
- Assessing Trustworthy AI in Times of COVID-19: Deep Learning for Predicting a Multiregional Score Conveying the Degree of Lung Compromise in COVID-19 Patients.IEEE transactions on technology and society · 2022Article
- An external stability audit framework to test the validity of personality prediction in AI hiring.Data mining and knowledge discovery · 2022Article
- Conformity Assessments and Post-market Monitoring: A Guide to the Role of Auditing in the Proposed European AI Regulation.Minds and machines · 2022Article
- Ethics as a Service: A Pragmatic Operationalisation of AI Ethics.Minds and machines · 2021Article
- The European Legislation on AI: a Brief Analysis of its Philosophical Approach.Philosophy & technology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Important decisions that impact humans lives, livelihoods, and the natural environment are increasingly being automated. Delegating tasks to so-called automated decision-making systems (ADMS) can improve efficiency and enable new solutions. However, these benefits are coupled with ethical challenges. For example, ADMS may produce discriminatory outcomes, violate individual privacy, and undermine human self-determination. New governance mechanisms are thus needed that help organisations design and deploy ADMS in ways that are ethical, while enabling society to reap the full economic and social benefits of automation. In this article, we consider the feasibility and efficacy of ethics-based auditing (EBA) as a governance mechanism that allows organisations to validate claims made about their ADMS. Building on previous work, we define EBA as a structured process whereby an entity's present or past behaviour is assessed for consistency with relevant principles or norms. We then offer three contributions to the existing literature. First, we provide a theoretical explanation of how EBA can contribute to good governance by promoting procedural regularity and transparency. Second, we propose seven criteria for how to design and implement EBA procedures successfully. Third, we identify and discuss the conceptual, technical, social, economic, organisational, and institutional constraints associated with EBA. We conclude that EBA should be considered an integral component of multifaced approaches to managing the ethical risks posed by ADMS.
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.