ArticleRegulation & governance2024
Trustworthy artificial intelligence and the European Union AI act: On the conflation of trustworthiness and acceptability of risk.
Article in Regulation & governance, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 252 citations in OpenAlex.
- AI spring and its regulation discourse: a bibliometric study of trends in literature.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Pooled it
- Digital diagnostics, biomarkers and therapeutics in an evolving healthcare system: From promise to practice.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Review
- Public Expectations for Food and Drug Administration Approval of AI-Based Clinical Decision Support Tools: Quantitative Study.JMIR AI · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence Across the Drug Development Lifecycle.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- AI ethics in Indian healthcare: a scoping review of national and international guidelines on privacy, data protection, and security.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- From co-creation to technical bias detection methods: an interdisciplinary showcase from the BIAS project.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Animal digital twins: systems architecture for climate-smart protein production.npj veterinary sciences · 2026Review
- Value Co-Creation Between Nurses and Generative Artificial Intelligence: A Grounded Theory Study.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
- High-risk without safeguards? The EU AI Act and the push for deregulation of medical AI.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Review
- Virtual medicine: medical AI in human health and diseases.Military Medical Research · 2026Review
- Unveiling the Algorithm: The Role of Explainable Artificial Intelligence in Modern Surgery.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- AI-augmented frameworks for enhancing Alzheimer's disease clinical trials: A memory clinic perspective.The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease · 2025Article
- Commentary: Trustworthy and ethical AI in digital mental healthcare - wishful thinking or tangible goal?Internet interventions · 2025Review
- Integration of artificial intelligence in nursing education: a cross-national exploration.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Explanation and elaboration of MedinAI: guidelines for reporting artificial intelligence studies in medicines, pharmacotherapy, and pharmaceutical services.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Article
- Technological Advances in Healthcare and Medical Deontology: Towards a Hybrid Clinical Methodology.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Evaluating the normative implications of national and international artificial intelligence policies for Sustainable Development Goal 3: good health and well-being.Health affairs scholar · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in neurovascular decision-making: a comparative analysis of ChatGPT-4 and multidisciplinary expert recommendations for unruptured intracranial aneurysms.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
- Article
- Influences on trust in the use of AI-based triage-an interview study with primary healthcare professionals and patients in Sweden.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
In its AI Act, the European Union chose to understand trustworthiness of AI in terms of the acceptability of its risks. Based on a narrative systematic literature review on institutional trust and AI in the public sector, this article argues that the EU adopted a simplistic conceptualization of trust and is overselling its regulatory ambition. The paper begins by reconstructing the conflation of "trustworthiness" with "acceptability" in the AI Act. It continues by developing a prescriptive set of variables for reviewing trust research in the context of AI. The paper then uses those variables for a narrative review of prior research on trust and trustworthiness in AI in the public sector. Finally, it relates the findings of the review to the EU's AI policy. Its prospects to successfully engineer citizen's trust are uncertain. There remains a threat of misalignment between levels of actual trust and the trustworthiness of applied AI.
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.