ArticleThe American journal of bioethics : AJOB2025
Patient Consent and The Right to Notice and Explanation of AI Systems Used in Health Care.
Article in The American journal of bioethics : AJOB, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethical considerations in generative artificial intelligence for synthetic data generation in ophthalmology.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in cardio-kidney-metabolic care: Transforming integrated disease management through data-informed innovation.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2026Review
- Informed Consent Disclosures and Minimum Requirements in AI Clinical Trials: Cross-Sectional Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence integrated multi-omics and multimodal studies promote the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: opportunities, challenges, and future perspectives.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2026Review
- Patients and donors trust in data authorization for AI-based medical research.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Explainability in AI-enabled medical neurotechnology: a scoping review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Community perspectives on health AI: hopes, concerns and implications for health systems and trustworthy AI.AI and ethics · 2026Article
- Clinician and simulated patient perspectives on ambient AI scribes in psychiatric consultations: a qualitative study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Public perspectives on artificial intelligence in healthcare in the USA: a cross-sectional survey.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Article
- Me, my doctor and AI: a qualitative interview study on patients' requirements for trustworthy use of AI-CDSS in ophthalmology.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Article
- Preparing Allergists to Practice in 2050 Using Artificial Intelligence.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2025Review
- Ethical implications of using general-purpose LLMs in clinical settings: a comparative analysis of prompt engineering strategies and their impact on patient safety.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- A practical framework for appropriate implementation and review of artificial intelligence (FAIR-AI) in healthcare.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Patient information needs for transparent and trustworthy cardiovascular artificial intelligence: A qualitative study.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Disclosure as Absolution in Medicine: Disentangling Autonomy from Beneficence and Justice in Artificial Intelligence.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2025Article
- How digital medicine redefines the landscape of care: Ethical and legal consequences in the case of psychiatry.Digital healthArticle
- What Does Moral Agency Mean for Nurses in the Era of Artificial Intelligence?The Hastings Center reportArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Given the need for enforceable guardrails for artificial intelligence (AI) that protect the public and allow for innovation, the U.S. Government recently issued a Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights which outlines five principles of safe AI design, use, and implementation. One in particular, the right to notice and explanation, requires accurately informing the public about the use of AI that impacts them in ways that are easy to understand. Yet, in the healthcare setting, it is unclear what goal the right to notice and explanation serves, and the moral importance of patient-level disclosure. We propose three normative functions of this right: (1) to notify patients about their care, (2) to educate patients and promote trust, and (3) to meet standards for informed consent. Additional clarity is needed to guide practices that respect the right to notice and explanation of AI in healthcare while providing meaningful benefits to patients.
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.