ReviewPflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology2025
The ethics of artificial intelligence systems in healthcare and medicine: from a local to a global perspective, and back.
Review in Pflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Artificial intelligence and cardiovascular biobanks: Shared technological promise and ethical responsibility].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2026Article
- Toward a multidimensional fitness paradigm: a critical review and agenda for science, practice, and policy.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Perspective: Machine Learning for Health Should Consider Social Drivers of Health.Proceedings of machine learning research · 2026Article
- Challenges in clinical translation of artificial intelligence and real-time imaging navigation in radical gastrectomy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Primary Care: Support or Additional Burden on Physicians' Healthcare Work?-A Qualitative Study.Clinics and practice · 2025Article
- The PERFORM Study: Artificial Intelligence Versus Human Residents in Cross-Sectional Obstetrics-Gynecology Scenarios Across Languages and Time Constraints.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2025Article
- Aligning With the Goals of the Planetary Health Concept Regarding Ecological Sustainability and Digital Health: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Special issue European Journal of Physiology: Artificial intelligence in the field of physiology and medicine.Pflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology · 2025Article
- Ethical and Legal Governance of Generative AI in Chinese Healthcare.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Artificial intelligence systems (ai-systems) (e.g. machine learning, generative artificial intelligence), in healthcare and medicine, have been received with hopes of better care quality, more efficiency, lower care costs, etc. Simultaneously, these systems have been met with reservations regarding their impacts on stakeholders' privacy, on changing power dynamics, on systemic biases, etc. Fortunately, healthcare and medicine have been guided by a multitude of ethical principles, frameworks, or approaches, which also guide the use of ai-systems in healthcare and medicine, in one form or another. Nevertheless, in this article, I argue that most of these approaches are inspired by a local isolationist view on ai-systems, here exemplified by the principlist approach. Despite positive contributions to laying out the ethical landscape of ai-systems in healthcare and medicine, such ethics approaches are too focused on a specific local healthcare and medical setting, be it a particular care relationship, a particular care organisation, or a particular society or region. By doing so, they lose sight of the global impacts ai-systems have, especially environmental impacts and related social impacts, such as increased health risks. To meet this gap, this article presents a global approach to the ethics of ai-systems in healthcare and medicine which consists of five levels of ethical impacts and analysis: individual-relational, organisational, societal, global, and historical. As such, this global approach incorporates the local isolationist view by integrating it in a wider landscape of ethical consideration so to ensure ai-systems meet the needs of everyone everywhere.
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.