ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2026
Ethical considerations for clinical adoption of ambient digital scribe technology.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2026. 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.
- The ethics of listening walls: patient autonomy and consent in the age of ambient clinical AI.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Clinicians' rationale for editing ambient AI-drafted clinical notes: persistent challenges and implications for improvement.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Article
- Use of AI scribes in UK primary care: a survey of general practitioners.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
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
Abstract
background and significanceAmbient digital scribe (ADS) platforms, which combine ambient speech recognition and large language models to generate clinical documentation, are currently undergoing rapid clinical adoption. Early data suggest that ADS utilization may reduce documentation burden and improve provider efficiency; however, the ethical implications of this largely unregulated technology remain relatively unexamined.
findingsIn this article, we identify and explore 4 key ethical issues surrounding ADS technology-safety, bias, data ownership, and justice-from a range of stakeholder perspectives. We provide an overview of current international regulatory policies, highlighting the need for standardized evaluation and reporting guidelines. RECOMMENDATIONS: Drawing on established ethical frameworks, we propose actionable recommendations for safe and equitable ADS implementation, including standardized evaluation metrics, regulatory oversight, and safeguards at institutional and end-user levels.
conclusionEnsuring the ethical implementation of ADS technology is essential for actualizing its potential benefits while upholding foundational principles of safety, equity, and transparency in clinical practice.
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.