ArticleBMC medical ethics2026
Medical artificial intelligence and the right to health.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2026. 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.
- Diabetes and Driving: How Predictive Technologies Will Alter Ethical and Legal Responsibilities.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The international human right to health states that people have claims to access goods, services, and infrastructure that protects an adequate standard of health. The current and forthcoming advances in artificial intelligence (AI), which significantly improve the quality and efficacy of medical care, could raise the current standard of healthcare owed under the right to health. In this paper, we identify three duties owed under the right to health and describe ways in which AI can uniquely or more efficiently fulfill these duties, namely the duties to provide: access to good quality care that effectively improves patient health; equitable access to healthcare for all persons; and novel healthcare services that can only be achievable by medical AI. This paper will also consider some potential objections to our claim such as whether medical AI may undermine, rather than fulfil, the social determinants of health. We conclude that if medical AI can partially fulfil the right to health through increasing access and quality of healthcare, and if providing medical AI can be balanced against other obligations and rights, states will have corresponding duties to not unnecessarily restrict AI innovation through regulation and may even be required to invest in medical AI infrastructure to meet the right to health of their populations.
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.