ArticlePhilosophy & technology2022
When Doctors and AI Interact: on Human Responsibility for Artificial Risks.
Article in Philosophy & technology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- The ethical requirement of explainability for AI-DSS in healthcare: a systematic review of reasons.BMC medical ethics · 2024Pooled it
- Impact of Responsibility Allocation Structures on Diagnostic Quality in AI-Assisted Diagnosis: Randomized Controlled Experiment.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Trial
- User perceptions of machine learning models as decision support for colorectal cancer multidisciplinary team conferences (AID-SIM-2): a qualitative simulation study.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2026Article
- Suspended responsibility: The trouble with integrating researchers into shared-responsibility models for machine learning-supported decisions.Health (London, England : 1997) · 2026Article
- Beyond Algorithmic Oversight: Internal Morality of Medicine and Meaningful Human Control in AI-Assisted Care.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Developments in the Management Strategies for Allergy: Advances in Artificial Intelligence and Future Perspectives.Anti-inflammatory & anti-allergy agents in medicinal chemistry · 2026Review
- The Evolution and Clinical Impact of Deep Learning Technologies in Breast MRI.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2025Review
- Can AI Be Useful in the Early Detection of Pancreatic Cancer in Patients with New-Onset Diabetes?Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Performance of Plug-In Augmented ChatGPT and Its Ability to Quantify Uncertainty: Simulation Study on the German Medical Board Examination.JMIR medical education · 2025Article
- The impact of digital health technologies on moral responsibility: a scoping review.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2025Article
- Can AI Answer My Questions? Utilizing Artificial Intelligence in the Perioperative Assessment for Abdominoplasty Patients.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2024Article
- Article
- Artificial intelligence, ChatGPT, and other large language models for social determinants of health: Current state and future directions.Cell reports. Medicine · 2024Review
- The performance of a deep learning system in assisting junior ophthalmologists in diagnosing 13 major fundus diseases: a prospective multi-center clinical trial.NPJ digital medicine · 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
- Responsibility and decision-making authority in using clinical decision support systems: an empirical-ethical exploration of German prospective professionals' preferences and concerns.Journal of medical ethics · 2023Article
- Review
- Levels of Autonomous Radiology.Interactive journal of medical research · 2022Article
- What Does Moral Agency Mean for Nurses in the Era of Artificial Intelligence?The Hastings Center reportArticle
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 at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A discussion concerning whether to conceive Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems as responsible moral entities, also known as "artificial moral agents" (AMAs), has been going on for some time. In this regard, we argue that the notion of "moral agency" is to be attributed only to humans based on their autonomy and sentience, which AI systems lack. We analyze human responsibility in the presence of AI systems in terms of meaningful control and due diligence and argue against fully automated systems in medicine. With this perspective in mind, we focus on the use of AI-based diagnostic systems and shed light on the complex networks of persons, organizations and artifacts that come to be when AI systems are designed, developed, and used in medicine. We then discuss relational criteria of judgment in support of the attribution of responsibility to humans when adverse events are caused or induced by errors in AI systems.
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.