Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41641919›Full record

ReviewThe Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics2025

What is Ethical Accountability?

Melissa M Goldstein

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Melissa M GoldsteinDepartment of Health Policy and Management, https://ror.org/00y4zzh67The George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5576-9018

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Farman Saeed Sedeeq and Percem Arman's article aims to develop a framework of AI governance that avoids shortcomings in existing models such as limited enforceability and rigid data-sharing rules. The goal of the weighty undertaking is to develop a "structured yet flexible approach" to balancing AI advancements in public health with ethical imperatives. Three core "pillars" are used for evaluation: ethical accountability, regulatory adaptability, and transparency. The concept of ethical accountability is explored briefly in this commentary.

Indexed as

Public HealthSocial ResponsibilityHumansInformation DisseminationAI Governanceethical accountabilitypublic health ethics

Identifiers

PMID41641919
PMCPMC12877734

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.