Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39290068›Full record

ReviewInquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing

Patient Autonomy in Medical Education: Navigating Ethical Challenges in the Age of Artificial Intelligence.

Hui Lu, Ahmad Alhaskawi, Yanzhao Dong, Xiaodi Zou, Haiying Zhou, Sohaib Hasan Abdullah Ezzi, Vishnu Goutham Kota, Mohamed Hasan Abdulla Hasan Abdulla, Sahar Ahmed Abdalbary

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Hui LuThe First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, P.R. China.ORCID 0000-0002-2969-4400
Ahmad AlhaskawiThe First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, P.R. China.
Yanzhao DongThe First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, P.R. China.
Xiaodi ZouThe First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Zhejiang Province, P.R. China.
Haiying ZhouThe Chinese University of Hong Kong, Rm Hong Kong, China.
Sohaib Hasan Abdullah EzziThird Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Hunan Province, P.R. China.ORCID 0000-0002-6080-6239
Vishnu Goutham KotaZhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, P.R. China.
Mohamed Hasan Abdulla Hasan AbdullaZhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, P.R. China.
Sahar Ahmed AbdalbaryNahda University in Beni Suef, Beni Suef, Egypt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The increasing integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the medical domain signifies a transformative era in healthcare, with promises of improved diagnostics, treatment, and patient outcomes. However, this rapid technological progress brings a concomitant surge in ethical challenges permeating medical education. This paper explores the crucial role of medical educators in adapting to these changes, ensuring that ethical education remains a central and adaptable component of medical curricula. Medical educators must evolve alongside AI's advancements, becoming stewards of ethical consciousness in an era where algorithms and data-driven decision-making play pivotal roles in patient care. The traditional paradigm of medical education, rooted in foundational ethical principles, must adapt to incorporate the complex ethical considerations introduced by AI. This pedagogical approach fosters dynamic engagement, cultivating a profound ethical awareness among students. It empowers them to critically assess the ethical implications of AI applications in healthcare, including issues related to data privacy, informed consent, algorithmic biases, and technology-mediated patient care. Moreover, the interdisciplinary nature of AI's ethical challenges necessitates collaboration with fields such as computer science, data ethics, law, and social sciences to provide a holistic understanding of the ethical landscape.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceEducation, MedicalInformed ConsentPersonal AutonomyCurriculumDecision MakingHumansartificial intelligencedata privacyethical challengesmedical educationpatient autonomy

Identifiers

PMID39290068
PMCPMC11409288

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.