ArticleBMC medical ethics2021
The ethics of machine learning-based clinical decision support: an analysis through the lens of professionalisation theory.
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 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Moral diversity and the challenge of responsibility in AI-CDSS.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2026Article
- Decision support in the management of musculoskeletal disorders: a qualitative study of physiotherapists' and patients' experiences.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Do predictors of motor recovery differ between robotic and conventional post-stroke rehabilitation?Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Towards responsible surveillance in preventive health data-AI research.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Risk prediction of hyperuricemia based on particle swarm fusion machine learning solely dependent on routine blood tests.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Clinicians' roles and necessary levels of understanding in the use of artificial intelligence: A qualitative interview study with German medical students.BMC medical ethics · 2024Article
- [Supporting medical and nursing activities with AI: recommendations for responsible design and use].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2024Article
- Impacts of Clinical Decision Support Systems on the Relationship, Communication, and Shared Decision-Making Between Health Care Professionals and Patients: Multistakeholder Interview Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- AI-Assisted Decision-Making in Long-Term Care: Qualitative Study on Prerequisites for Responsible Innovation.JMIR nursing · 2024Article
- Artifical intelligence in surgery: ethical considerations in the light of social trends in the perception of health and medicine.EFORT open reviews · 2024Review
- Review
- Metaheuristic-Based Feature Selection Methods for Diagnosing Sarcopenia with Machine Learning Algorithms.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Doctors' perception on the ethical use of AI-enabled clinical decision support systems for antibiotic prescribing recommendations in Singapore.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Lessons learned from developing a COVID-19 algorithm governance framework in Aotearoa New Zealand.Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand · 2023Article
- Multimodal machine learning in precision health: A scoping review.NPJ digital medicine · 2022Article
- External Validation of a Laboratory Prediction Algorithm for the Reduction of Unnecessary Labs in the Critical Care Setting.The American journal of medicine · 2022Article
- Irradiation immunity interactions.Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology · 2022Review
- Physician preference for receiving machine learning predictive results: A cross-sectional multicentric study.PloS one · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMachine learning-based clinical decision support systems (ML_CDSS) are increasingly employed in various sectors of health care aiming at supporting clinicians' practice by matching the characteristics of individual patients with a computerised clinical knowledge base. Some studies even indicate that ML_CDSS may surpass physicians' competencies regarding specific isolated tasks. From an ethical perspective, however, the usage of ML_CDSS in medical practice touches on a range of fundamental normative issues. This article aims to add to the ethical discussion by using professionalisation theory as an analytical lens for investigating how medical action at the micro level and the physician-patient relationship might be affected by the employment of ML_CDSS. MAIN TEXT: Professionalisation theory, as a distinct sociological framework, provides an elaborated account of what constitutes client-related professional action, such as medical action, at its core and why it is more than pure expertise-based action. Professionalisation theory is introduced by presenting five general structural features of professionalised medical practice: (i) the patient has a concern; (ii) the physician deals with the patient's concern; (iii) s/he gives assistance without patronising; (iv) s/he regards the patient in a holistic manner without building up a private relationship; and (v) s/he applies her/his general expertise to the particularities of the individual case. Each of these five key aspects are then analysed regarding the usage of ML_CDSS, thereby integrating the perspectives of professionalisation theory and medical ethics.
conclusionsUsing ML_CDSS in medical practice requires the physician to pay special attention to those facts of the individual case that cannot be comprehensively considered by ML_CDSS, for example, the patient's personality, life situation or cultural background. Moreover, the more routinized the use of ML_CDSS becomes in clinical practice, the more that physicians need to focus on the patient's concern and strengthen patient autonomy, for instance, by adequately integrating digital decision support in shared decision-making.
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.