Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: Issues When Determining Negligence.

IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Journal of Law and Medicine Pub Date : 2023-12-01
Paul Nolan, Rita Matulionyte
{"title":"Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: Issues When Determining Negligence.","authors":"Paul Nolan, Rita Matulionyte","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The introduction of novel medical technology, such as artificial intelligence (AI), into traditional clinical practice presents legal liability challenges that need to be squarely addressed by litigants and courts when something goes wrong. Some of the most promising applications for the use of AI in medicine will lead to vexed liability questions. As AI in health care is in its relative infancy, there is a paucity of case law globally upon which to draw. This article analyses medical malpractice where AI is involved, what problems arise when applying the tort of negligence - such as establishing the essential elements of breach of duty of care and causation - and how can these can be addressed. Product liability under Australian Consumer Law is beyond the scope of this article. In order to address this question, the article: (1) identifies the general problems that black box AI causes in the health care sector; (2) identifies the problems that will arise in establishing breach and causation due to the \"black box\" nature of AI, with reference to the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) and common law through two hypothetical examples; and (3) considers selected legal solutions to the problems caused by \"black box\" AI.</p>","PeriodicalId":45522,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and Medicine","volume":"30 3","pages":"593-615"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The introduction of novel medical technology, such as artificial intelligence (AI), into traditional clinical practice presents legal liability challenges that need to be squarely addressed by litigants and courts when something goes wrong. Some of the most promising applications for the use of AI in medicine will lead to vexed liability questions. As AI in health care is in its relative infancy, there is a paucity of case law globally upon which to draw. This article analyses medical malpractice where AI is involved, what problems arise when applying the tort of negligence - such as establishing the essential elements of breach of duty of care and causation - and how can these can be addressed. Product liability under Australian Consumer Law is beyond the scope of this article. In order to address this question, the article: (1) identifies the general problems that black box AI causes in the health care sector; (2) identifies the problems that will arise in establishing breach and causation due to the "black box" nature of AI, with reference to the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) and common law through two hypothetical examples; and (3) considers selected legal solutions to the problems caused by "black box" AI.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人工智能在医学中的应用:确定过失时的问题。
在传统临床实践中引入人工智能(AI)等新型医疗技术会带来法律责任方面的挑战,当出现问题时,诉讼当事人和法院需要正视这些挑战。人工智能在医疗领域的一些最有前景的应用将导致棘手的责任问题。由于人工智能在医疗领域的应用尚处于起步阶段,全球范围内可借鉴的判例法并不多。本文分析了涉及人工智能的医疗事故,在适用过失侵权时会出现哪些问题--例如确定违反护理责任和因果关系的基本要素--以及如何解决这些问题。澳大利亚消费者法》规定的产品责任不在本文讨论范围之内。为了解决这个问题,本文将(1)确定黑盒人工智能在医疗保健领域造成的一般问题;(2)参照《2002 年民事责任法》(新南威尔士州)和普通法,通过两个假设的例子,确定由于人工智能的 "黑盒 "性质而在确定违约和因果关系时会出现的问题;以及(3)考虑针对 "黑盒 "人工智能造成的问题所选择的法律解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
63
期刊最新文献
Challenging Pandemic Law: From Vaccine Mandates to Judicial Review of Vaccine Approvals. Cystic Fibrosis and the Law: The Ramifications of New Treatments. Denial of Desire for Death in Dementia: Why Is Dementia Excluded from Australian Voluntary Assisted Dying Legislation? Informed Consent and the Duty to Warn: More than the Mere Provision of Information. Insight and the Capacity to Refuse Treatment with Electroconvulsive Therapy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1