ArticleAI & society2024
Beyond ideals: why the (medical) AI industry needs to motivate behavioural change in line with fairness and transparency values, and how it can do it.
Article in AI & society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine learning for precision medicine: promoting value considerations through perspective-taking hypothetical group design exercises.AI and ethics · 2026Article
- Behavior change beyond intervention: an activity-theoretical perspective on human-centered design of personal health technology.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- AI-driven virtual cell models in preclinical research: technical pathways, validation mechanisms, and clinical translation potential.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Applying an Agile Science Roadmap to Integrate and Evaluate Ethical Frameworks Throughout the Lifecycle and Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools in the Intensive Care Unit.Critical care nursing clinics of North America · 2025Review
- Motivating Transparent Communications about Bias in Healthcare Technology Development.Collabra. Psychology · 2025Article
- When can we Kick (Some) Humans "Out of the Loop"? An Examination of the use of AI in Medical Imaging for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.Asian bioethics review · 2025Article
- Predicting first time depression onset in pregnancy: applying machine learning methods to patient-reported data.Archives of women's mental health · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly relied upon by clinicians for making diagnostic and treatment decisions, playing an important role in imaging, diagnosis, risk analysis, lifestyle monitoring, and health information management. While research has identified biases in healthcare AI systems and proposed technical solutions to address these, we argue that effective solutions require human engagement. Furthermore, there is a lack of research on how to motivate the adoption of these solutions and promote investment in designing AI systems that align with values such as transparency and fairness from the outset. Drawing on insights from psychological theories, we assert the need to understand the values that underlie decisions made by individuals involved in creating and deploying AI systems. We describe how this understanding can be leveraged to increase engagement with de-biasing and fairness-enhancing practices within the AI healthcare industry, ultimately leading to sustained behavioral change via autonomy-supportive communication strategies rooted in motivational and social psychology theories. In developing these pathways to engagement, we consider the norms and needs that govern the AI healthcare domain, and we evaluate incentives for maintaining the status quo against economic, legal, and social incentives for behavior change in line with transparency and fairness values.
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.