ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2024
Algor-ethics: charting the ethical path for AI in critical care.
Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence for early sepsis detection and dynamic prognostication in onco-critical care.World journal of critical care medicine · 2026Review
- From the Pain Matrix to Functional Networks: A Narrative Review of Chronic Pain Mechanisms Across Adult and Pediatric Populations with Emerging AI Perspectives.Brain sciences · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence to Facilitate SEP-1 Measure Compliance and Fluid Management in Sepsis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence-guided tools in adult ECMO: Current advancements, emerging Trends and future directions.Perfusion · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in trauma care: applications, ethical challenges, and pathways toward responsible integration.Current opinion in anaesthesiology · 2026Article
- Ethical, legal, and social issues of AI use in emergency healthcare: a scoping review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Digital health technologies in medicine: evidence, artificial intelligence integration, and ethical challenges.Infectious agents and cancer · 2026Review
- How large language models can help us write a systematic review.Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Algor-Ethics in Diabetes Care: Mapping the Route.Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews · 2026Review
- Translational Potential and Explainability of Artificial Intelligence-Based Clinical Decision Support for Adults in Intensive Care: A Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
- Ethical challenges and governance of artificial intelligence in hepatocellular carcinoma management : Wan DL et al. Ethical considerations in AI for hepatocellular carcinoma.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2025Review
- Top three priorities for artificial intelligence integration into emergency, critical, and perioperative medicine: an interdisciplinary clinical expert consensus.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2025Review
- Expert consensus on feasibility and application of automatic pain assessment in routine clinical use.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2025Review
- AI for chronic pain in children: a powerful resource.BMC pediatrics · 2025Article
- Ethical Considerations in the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Pain Medicine.Current pain and headache reports · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence in dentistry: Balancing innovation with ethical responsibility.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Driven Diagnostic Processes and Comprehensive Multimodal Models in Pain Medicine.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Pain in Children With ADHD: Mechanisms, Clinical Presentation, and Implications for Assessment and Management.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The integration of Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS) based on artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare is groundbreaking evolution with enormous potential, but its development and ethical implementation, presents unique challenges, particularly in critical care, where physicians often deal with life-threating conditions requiring rapid actions and patients unable to participate in the decisional process. Moreover, development of AI-based CDSS is complex and should address different sources of bias, including data acquisition, health disparities, domain shifts during clinical use, and cognitive biases in decision-making. In this scenario algor-ethics is mandatory and emphasizes the integration of 'Human-in-the-Loop' and 'Algorithmic Stewardship' principles, and the benefits of advanced data engineering. The establishment of Clinical AI Departments (CAID) is necessary to lead AI innovation in healthcare, ensuring ethical integrity and human-centered development in this rapidly evolving field.
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.