ArticlePLOS digital health2024
Synthetic data and ELSI-focused computational checklists-A survey of biomedical professionals' views.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethical considerations for multimodal artificial intelligence in healthcare.AI and ethics · 2026Article
- Moving the Fine Print to the Front Page: Transparent Communication of Facial Genetics Research.Advanced genetics (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Discussing Data: A UK-wide public consultation on the use of low fidelity synthetic data for research.International journal of population data science · 2025Article
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
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) tools are now proliferating in biomedical contexts, and there is no sign this will slow down any time soon. AI/ML and related technologies promise to improve scientific understanding of health and disease and have the potential to spur the development of innovative and effective diagnostics, treatments, cures, and medical technologies. Concerns about AI/ML are prominent, but attention to two specific aspects of AI/ML have so far received little research attention: synthetic data and computational checklists that might promote not only the reproducibility of AI/ML tools but also increased attention to ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of AI/ML tools. We administered a targeted survey to explore these two items among biomedical professionals in the United States. Our survey findings suggest that there is a gap in familiarity with both synthetic data and computational checklists among AI/ML users and developers and those in ethics-related positions who might be tasked with ensuring the proper use or oversight of AI/ML tools. The findings from this survey study underscore the need for additional ELSI research on synthetic data and computational checklists to inform escalating efforts, including the establishment of laws and policies, to ensure safe, effective, and ethical use of AI in health settings.
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.