Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37524914›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Urology2024

Artificial intelligence and urology: ethical considerations for urologists and patients.

Giovanni E Cacciamani, Andrew Chen, Inderbir S Gill, Andrew J Hung

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Applications of AI in urology.Nature reviews. Urology · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

4 authors.

Giovanni E CacciamaniThe Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, USC Institute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. giovanni.cacciamani@med.usc.edu.
Andrew ChenThe Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, USC Institute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Inderbir S GillThe Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, USC Institute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Andrew J HungThe Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, USC Institute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7201-6736

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine and in urology specifically has increased over the past few years, during which time it has enabled optimization of patient workflow, increased diagnostic accuracy and enhanced computer analysis of radiological and pathological images. However, before further use of AI is undertaken, possible ethical issues need to be evaluated to improve understanding of this technology and to protect patients and providers. Possible ethical issues that require consideration when applying AI in clinical practice include patient safety, cybersecurity, transparency and interpretability of the data, inclusivity and equity, fostering responsibility and accountability, and the preservation of providers' decision-making and autonomy. Ethical principles for the application of AI to health care and in urology are proposed to guide urologists, patients and regulators to improve use of AI technologies and guide policy-making.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceUrologyHumansUrologists

Identifiers

PMID37524914

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.