Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35360424›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in surgery2022

Legal and Ethical Consideration in Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: Who Takes Responsibility?

Nithesh Naik, B M Zeeshan Hameed, Dasharathraj K Shetty, Dishant Swain, Milap Shah, Rahul Paul, Kaivalya Aggarwal, Sufyan Ibrahim, Vathsala Patil, Komal Smriti and 4 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 297 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
297citing papers in PubMed, 9 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

297 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. AI in Medical Questionnaires: Scoping ReviewJournal of medical Internet research · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

237 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

14 authors.

Nithesh NaikDepartment of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
B M Zeeshan HameedInternational Training and Research in Uro-Oncology and Endourology Group, Manipal, India.
Dasharathraj K ShettyDepartment of Humanities and Management, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Dishant SwainDepartment of Instrumentation and Control Engineering, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Milap ShahInternational Training and Research in Uro-Oncology and Endourology Group, Manipal, India.
Rahul PaulDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Kaivalya AggarwalDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Sufyan IbrahimInternational Training and Research in Uro-Oncology and Endourology Group, Manipal, India.
Vathsala PatilDepartment of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Komal SmritiDepartment of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Suyog ShettyDepartment of Urology, Father Muller Medical College, Mangalore, India.
Bhavan Prasad RaiInternational Training and Research in Uro-Oncology and Endourology Group, Manipal, India.
Piotr ChlostaDepartment of Urology, Jagiellonian University in Krakow, Kraków, Poland.
Bhaskar K SomaniInternational Training and Research in Uro-Oncology and Endourology Group, Manipal, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The legal and ethical issues that confront society due to Artificial Intelligence (AI) include privacy and surveillance, bias or discrimination, and potentially the philosophical challenge is the role of human judgment. Concerns about newer digital technologies becoming a new source of inaccuracy and data breaches have arisen as a result of its use. Mistakes in the procedure or protocol in the field of healthcare can have devastating consequences for the patient who is the victim of the error. Because patients come into contact with physicians at moments in their lives when they are most vulnerable, it is crucial to remember this. Currently, there are no well-defined regulations in place to address the legal and ethical issues that may arise due to the use of artificial intelligence in healthcare settings. This review attempts to address these pertinent issues highlighting the need for algorithmic transparency, privacy, and protection of all the beneficiaries involved and cybersecurity of associated vulnerabilities.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceethical issueslegal issuesmachine learningsocial issues

Identifiers

PMID35360424
PMCPMC8963864

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.