On the ethical and moral dimensions of using artificial intelligence for evidence synthesis.

IF 2.5 PLOS global public health Pub Date : 2025-03-19 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pgph.0004348
Soumyadeep Bhaumik
{"title":"On the ethical and moral dimensions of using artificial intelligence for evidence synthesis.","authors":"Soumyadeep Bhaumik","doi":"10.1371/journal.pgph.0004348","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being used in the field of medicine and healthcare. However, there are no articles specifically examining ethical and moral dimensions of AI use for evidence synthesis. This article attempts to fills this gap. In doing so, I deploy in written form, what in Bengali philosophy and culture, is the Adda (আড্ডা) approach, a form of oral exchange, which involves deep but conversational style discussion. Adda developed as a form of intellectual resistance against the cultural hegemony of British Imperialism and entails asking provocative question to encourage critical discourse.The raison d'être for using AI is that it would enhance efficiency in the conduct of evidence synthesis, thus leading to greater evidence uptake. I question whether assuming so without any empirical evidence is ethical. I then examine the challenges posed by the lack of moral agency of AI; the issue of bias and discrimination being amplified through AI driven evidence synthesis; ethical and moral dimensions of epistemic (knowledge-related) uncertainty on AI; impact of knowledge systems (training of future scientists, and epistemic conformity), and the need for looking at ethical and moral dimensions beyond technical evaluation of AI models. I then discuss ethical and moral responsibilities of government, multi-laterals, research institutions and funders in regulating and having an oversight role in development, validation, and conduct of evidence synthesis. I argue that industry self-regulation for responsible use of AI is unlikely to address ethical and moral concerns, and that there is a need to develop legal frameworks, ethics codes, and of bringing such work within the ambit of institutional ethics committees to enable appreciation of the complexities around use of AI for evidence synthesis, mitigate against moral hazards, and ensure that evidence synthesis leads to improvement of health of individuals, nations and societies.</p>","PeriodicalId":74466,"journal":{"name":"PLOS global public health","volume":"5 3","pages":"e0004348"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11922218/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLOS global public health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0004348","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being used in the field of medicine and healthcare. However, there are no articles specifically examining ethical and moral dimensions of AI use for evidence synthesis. This article attempts to fills this gap. In doing so, I deploy in written form, what in Bengali philosophy and culture, is the Adda (আড্ডা) approach, a form of oral exchange, which involves deep but conversational style discussion. Adda developed as a form of intellectual resistance against the cultural hegemony of British Imperialism and entails asking provocative question to encourage critical discourse.The raison d'être for using AI is that it would enhance efficiency in the conduct of evidence synthesis, thus leading to greater evidence uptake. I question whether assuming so without any empirical evidence is ethical. I then examine the challenges posed by the lack of moral agency of AI; the issue of bias and discrimination being amplified through AI driven evidence synthesis; ethical and moral dimensions of epistemic (knowledge-related) uncertainty on AI; impact of knowledge systems (training of future scientists, and epistemic conformity), and the need for looking at ethical and moral dimensions beyond technical evaluation of AI models. I then discuss ethical and moral responsibilities of government, multi-laterals, research institutions and funders in regulating and having an oversight role in development, validation, and conduct of evidence synthesis. I argue that industry self-regulation for responsible use of AI is unlikely to address ethical and moral concerns, and that there is a need to develop legal frameworks, ethics codes, and of bringing such work within the ambit of institutional ethics committees to enable appreciation of the complexities around use of AI for evidence synthesis, mitigate against moral hazards, and ensure that evidence synthesis leads to improvement of health of individuals, nations and societies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
论人工智能在证据合成中的伦理道德维度。
人工智能(AI)越来越多地应用于医学和医疗保健领域。然而,没有文章专门研究人工智能用于证据合成的伦理和道德层面。本文试图填补这一空白。在这样做的过程中,我采用了书面形式,在孟加拉哲学和文化中,这是一种口头交流的方式,包括深入但对话式的讨论。Adda是一种反对英帝国主义文化霸权的智力抵抗形式,需要提出挑衅性的问题来鼓励批判性话语。être使用人工智能的原因是,它将提高进行证据合成的效率,从而导致更多的证据吸收。我质疑在没有任何经验证据的情况下这样假设是否合乎道德。然后,我研究了人工智能缺乏道德能动性所带来的挑战;通过人工智能驱动的证据综合,偏见和歧视问题被放大;人工智能认知(知识相关)不确定性的伦理和道德维度;知识系统的影响(未来科学家的培训和认知一致性),以及超越人工智能模型技术评估的伦理和道德层面的需求。然后,我将讨论政府、多边机构、研究机构和资助者在规范和监督证据合成的发展、验证和实施方面的伦理和道德责任。我认为,负责任地使用人工智能的行业自我监管不太可能解决伦理和道德问题,有必要制定法律框架和道德准则,并将此类工作纳入机构伦理委员会的范围,以便能够了解人工智能用于证据合成的复杂性,减轻道德风险,并确保证据合成能够改善个人、国家和社会的健康。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Willingness to pay for solid waste management services and associated factors in Mbarara District, Southwestern Uganda. Multimodal pulse oximeters to support the integrated management of childhood illnesses: A usability and diagnostic accuracy assessment from a multi-country hybrid type 2 study. Mapping the rare disease stakeholders in India. The integration of communicable and non-communicable disease (CD-NCD) health services in Africa: A scoping review. Visa restrictions: A structural determinant of global health that must be confronted head-on.
×
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:604180095
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