Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39294061›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet. Digital health2024

Generative artificial intelligence and ethical considerations in health care: a scoping review and ethics checklist.

Yilin Ning, Salinelat Teixayavong, Yuqing Shang, Julian Savulescu, Vaishaanth Nagaraj, Di Miao, Mayli Mertens, Daniel Shu Wei Ting, Jasmine Chiat Ling Ong, Mingxuan Liu and 7 more

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet. Digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT06926348 (Usability, Acceptability, and Preliminary Effectiveness of a Digital Health Technology for Patient Monitoring of Chronic Insomnia Symptoms and the Promotion of Functional Sleep Behaviors), which is not on this map. Cited by 92 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
92citing papers in PubMed, 4 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.

NCT06926348 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Usability, Acceptability, and Preliminary Effectiveness of a Digital Health Technology for Patient Monitoring of Chronic Insomnia Symptoms and the Promotion of Functional Sleep Behaviors: A Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversita di VeronaRan2025 to 2026Enrolled50ConditionsInsomnia Chronic, InsomniaArmsDigital Health Technology for Chronic Insomnia, Treatment as Usual (TAU)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

92 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

32 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Yilin NingCentre for Quantitative Medicine, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore.
Salinelat TeixayavongCentre for Quantitative Medicine, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore.
Yuqing ShangCentre for Quantitative Medicine, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore.
Julian SavulescuCentre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore; Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Vaishaanth NagarajSchool of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Di MiaoCentre for Quantitative Medicine, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore.
Mayli MertensCentre for Ethics, Department of Philosophy, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium; Antwerp Center on Responsible AI, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Daniel Shu Wei TingCentre for Quantitative Medicine, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore; Singapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore; SingHealth AI Office, Singapore Health Services, Singapore.
Jasmine Chiat Ling OngDivision of Pharmacy, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Mingxuan LiuCentre for Quantitative Medicine, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore.
Jiuwen CaoMachine Learning and I-Health International Cooperation Base of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou Dianzi University, Zhejiang, China; Artificial Intelligence Institute, Hangzhou Dianzi University, Zhejiang, China.
Michael DunnCentre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Roger VaughanCentre for Quantitative Medicine, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore; Programme in Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore.
Marcus Eng Hock OngProgramme in Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore; Department of Emergency Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Joseph Jao-Yiu SungLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
Eric J TopolScripps Research Translational Institute, Scripps Research, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Nan LiuCentre for Quantitative Medicine, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore; Programme in Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore; Institute of Data Science, National University of Singapore, Singapore. Electronic address: liu.nan@duke-nus.edu.sg.

Funding

Scripps Clinical and Translational Science HubUM1TR004407 · NCATS · SCRIPPS RESEARCH INSTITUTE, THE · PI Eric Jeffrey Topol · 2023 to 2026
$24.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UM1 TR004407Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The widespread use of Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (known as ChatGPT) and other emerging technology that is powered by generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has drawn attention to the potential ethical issues they can cause, especially in high-stakes applications such as health care, but ethical discussions have not yet been translated into operationalisable solutions. Furthermore, ongoing ethical discussions often neglect other types of GenAI that have been used to synthesise data (eg, images) for research and practical purposes, which resolve some ethical issues and expose others. We did a scoping review of the ethical discussions on GenAI in health care to comprehensively analyse gaps in the research. To reduce the gaps, we have developed a checklist for comprehensive assessment and evaluation of ethical discussions in GenAI research. The checklist can be integrated into peer review and publication systems to enhance GenAI research and might be useful for ethics-related disclosures for GenAI-powered products and health-care applications of such products and beyond.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceChecklistDelivery of Health CareHumans

Identifiers

PMID39294061
PMCPMC11542614

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.