ArticleCritical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine2025
AI ethics for the everyday intensivist.
Article in Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A dialectical lens for AI and medical humanities: advancing responsible augmented humanism in Digital Public Health.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In Australian intensive care units (ICUs), Artificial Intelligence (AI) promises to enhance efficiency and improve patient outcomes. However, ethical concerns surrounding AI must be addressed before widespread adoption. We examine the ethical challenges of of AI using the framework of the four pillars of biomedical ethics-beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice, and discuss the need for a fifth pillar of explicability. We consider the risks of perpetuating inequities, privacy breaches, and unintended harms, particularly in disadvantaged populations such as First Nations people. We advocate for a national strategy for ICUs to guide the ethical implementation of AI, that aligns with existing National AI Frameworks. Our recommendations for implementation of safe and ethical AI in ICU include education, developing guidelines, and ensuring transparency in AI decision-making. A coordinated strategy is essential to balance AI's benefits with the ethical responsibility to protect patients and healthcare providers in critical care settings.
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.