Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39830782›Full record

ArticleJournal of radiology nursing2023

Socrates in the Machine: The "House Ethicist" in AI for Healthcare.

Luis García Valiña, Paola Buedo, Timothy Daly

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of radiology nursing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Luis García ValiñaBioethics Program, FLACSO Argentina, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Paola BuedoBioethics Program, FLACSO Argentina, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Timothy DalyBioethics Program, FLACSO Argentina, Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Funding

Training Program in Research Ethics in the AmericasR25TW001605 · FIC · YESHIVA UNIVERSITY · PI LUNA, FLORENCIA · 2000 to 2025
$6.7M
FIC NIH HHS R25 TW001605
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The physical presence of an on-site ethics expert has emerged as one way of addressing current and future ethical issues associated with the use of artificial intelligence in healthcare. We describe and evaluate different roles of the "house ethicist," a figure we consider beneficial to both artificial intelligence research and society. However, we also argue that the house ethicist is currently in need of further professionalization to meet a number of challenges outlined here and will require both individual and concerted community efforts to ensure the flourishing of the embedded ethics approach.

Indexed as

AIEmbedded ethicsEthicsHealthcareHouse ethicist

Identifiers

PMID39830782
PMCPMC11741191

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.