Clinical decision-making and algorithmic inequality.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

1. Ethical challenges in the algorithmic era: a systematic rapid review of risk insights and governance pathways for nursing predictive analytics and early warning systems.BMC medical ethics · 2025
   Pooled it
2. Turkish adaptation of the artificial intelligence ethics scale (EAI): a validity and reliability study for nursing students.BMC psychology · 2025
   Article
3. Disability 4.0: bioethical considerations on the use of embodied artificial intelligence.Frontiers in medicine · 2024
   Article
4. Robotics and AI into healthcare from the perspective of European regulation: who is responsible for medical malpractice?Frontiers in medicine · 2024
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Evaluating equity in performance of an electronic health record-based 6-month mortality risk model to trigger palliative care consultation: a retrospective model validation analysis.2023

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as