ArticleAsian bioethics review2024
Moving beyond Technical Issues to Stakeholder Involvement: Key Areas for Consideration in the Development of Human-Centred and Trusted AI in Healthcare.
Article in Asian bioethics review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Type and Timing of Clinician-Facing AI Support on Patient Trust in Medical Consultations: 2 Vignette Experiments.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Process Improvement Before Artificial Intelligence and Automation: Building Trust With the Understand-Transform-Sustain Framework.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2026Article
- Patients' and Providers' Attitudes Toward Artificial Intelligence and Electronic Health Record Use in Deep Phenotyping and Rare-Disease Screening: An Empty Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Perspectives on the use of artificial intelligence in Japan: a focus group interview study of healthcare providers.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Research Progress in Artificial Intelligence for Central Serous Chorioretinopathy: A Systematic Review.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Review
- Enhancing Ophthalmic Diagnosis and Treatment with Artificial Intelligence.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Discussion around the increasing use of AI in healthcare tends to focus on the technical aspects of the technology rather than the socio-technical issues associated with implementation. In this paper, we argue for the development of a sustained societal dialogue between stakeholders around the use of AI in healthcare. We contend that a more human-centred approach to AI implementation in healthcare is needed which is inclusive of the views of a range of stakeholders. We identify four key areas to support stakeholder involvement that would enhance the development, implementation, and evaluation of AI in healthcare leading to greater levels of trust. These are as follows: (1) aligning AI development practices with social values, (2) appropriate and proportionate involvement of stakeholders, (3) understanding the importance of building trust in AI, (4) embedding stakeholder-driven governance to support these activities.
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.