人工智能在皮肤癌诊断中的伦理意义:用例分析。

IF 11 1区 医学 Q1 DERMATOLOGY British Journal of Dermatology Pub Date : 2024-11-06 DOI:10.1093/bjd/ljae434
Syed F H Shah, Daniel Arecco, Heather Draper, Simona Tiribelli, Eli Harriss, Rubeta N Matin
{"title":"人工智能在皮肤癌诊断中的伦理意义:用例分析。","authors":"Syed F H Shah, Daniel Arecco, Heather Draper, Simona Tiribelli, Eli Harriss, Rubeta N Matin","doi":"10.1093/bjd/ljae434","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Skin cancer is the most common cancer worldwide. Early diagnosis is crucial for improving patient survival and morbidity. Artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted smartphone applications (apps) for skin cancer potentially offer accessible, early risk assessment of suspicious skin lesions. However, the integration of novel technologies into dermatology pathways raises ethical concerns. Although ethical principles for AI governance are well known, how these principles should be applied to real-life AI apps readily available for public use is less well understood.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We conducted an ethical use-case analysis of commercially available skin cancer apps to better understand the ethical issues arising from their development and use in a real-world context.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Established methods for ethical analysis of clinical AI applications were applied to two popular skin cancer apps in the UK: SkinVision and Scanoma. Systematic searches of published literature, regulatory documents, and websites were conducted to review the evidence regarding app development, effectiveness, and use. Screening for inclusion was undertaken by two researchers independently. Ethical concerns were identified with reference to previously described ethical concerns and principles for AI-assisted healthcare.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>By conceptualising ethical principles within the use-context of skin cancer apps, we identified specific ethical issues arising throughout the AI lifecycle of both apps. One company provided extensive detail regarding algorithm development and decision-making, this information was insufficiently reported for the other app. Other concerns identified related to number, quality, and consistency of studies assessing algorithm efficacy. Limited efforts to address potential skin tone biases and exclusion of individuals with darker skin tones as target users by one app risks perpetuating existing inequalities. Inadequate regulatory oversight was identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings from our ethical use-case analysis of two patient-facing AI-assisted skin cancer apps suggest inadequate incorporation of bioethical norms such as justice, responsibility and transparency into the development and deployment of both apps. Improved regulation should increase accountability. Ensuring ethics by design through integration between technology developers, dermatologists, ethicists, and the public is urgently needed to prevent the potential benefits of AI-assisted skin cancer apps being overshadowed by potential ethical harms.</p>","PeriodicalId":9238,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Dermatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":11.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ethical implications of artificial intelligence in skin cancer diagnostics: use-case analyses.\",\"authors\":\"Syed F H Shah, Daniel Arecco, Heather Draper, Simona Tiribelli, Eli Harriss, Rubeta N Matin\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/bjd/ljae434\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Skin cancer is the most common cancer worldwide. Early diagnosis is crucial for improving patient survival and morbidity. Artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted smartphone applications (apps) for skin cancer potentially offer accessible, early risk assessment of suspicious skin lesions. However, the integration of novel technologies into dermatology pathways raises ethical concerns. Although ethical principles for AI governance are well known, how these principles should be applied to real-life AI apps readily available for public use is less well understood.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We conducted an ethical use-case analysis of commercially available skin cancer apps to better understand the ethical issues arising from their development and use in a real-world context.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Established methods for ethical analysis of clinical AI applications were applied to two popular skin cancer apps in the UK: SkinVision and Scanoma. Systematic searches of published literature, regulatory documents, and websites were conducted to review the evidence regarding app development, effectiveness, and use. Screening for inclusion was undertaken by two researchers independently. Ethical concerns were identified with reference to previously described ethical concerns and principles for AI-assisted healthcare.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>By conceptualising ethical principles within the use-context of skin cancer apps, we identified specific ethical issues arising throughout the AI lifecycle of both apps. One company provided extensive detail regarding algorithm development and decision-making, this information was insufficiently reported for the other app. Other concerns identified related to number, quality, and consistency of studies assessing algorithm efficacy. Limited efforts to address potential skin tone biases and exclusion of individuals with darker skin tones as target users by one app risks perpetuating existing inequalities. Inadequate regulatory oversight was identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings from our ethical use-case analysis of two patient-facing AI-assisted skin cancer apps suggest inadequate incorporation of bioethical norms such as justice, responsibility and transparency into the development and deployment of both apps. Improved regulation should increase accountability. Ensuring ethics by design through integration between technology developers, dermatologists, ethicists, and the public is urgently needed to prevent the potential benefits of AI-assisted skin cancer apps being overshadowed by potential ethical harms.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9238,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Dermatology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Dermatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjd/ljae434\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DERMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjd/ljae434","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:皮肤癌是全球最常见的癌症:皮肤癌是全球最常见的癌症。早期诊断对于提高患者生存率和发病率至关重要。人工智能(AI)辅助的皮肤癌智能手机应用程序(Apps)可对可疑皮肤病变进行早期风险评估。然而,将新技术整合到皮肤病治疗路径中会引发伦理问题。虽然人工智能管理的伦理原则已广为人知,但如何将这些原则应用于公众可随时使用的现实生活中的人工智能应用程序却不甚了解:我们对市场上销售的皮肤癌应用程序进行了伦理用例分析,以更好地了解在现实世界中开发和使用这些应用程序所产生的伦理问题:方法:将临床人工智能应用伦理分析的既定方法应用于英国两款流行的皮肤癌应用程序:SkinVision和Scanoma。我们对已发表的文献、监管文件和网站进行了系统检索,以审查与应用程序的开发、有效性和使用有关的证据。纳入筛选由两名研究人员独立完成。在确定伦理问题时,参考了之前描述的人工智能辅助医疗的伦理问题和原则:通过对皮肤癌应用程序使用背景下的伦理原则进行概念化,我们确定了这两款应用程序在整个人工智能生命周期中出现的具体伦理问题。其中一家公司提供了大量有关算法开发和决策的详细信息,而另一家公司则没有充分报告这方面的信息。发现的其他问题涉及评估算法功效的研究数量、质量和一致性。一家公司在解决潜在的肤色偏差和将肤色较深的个人排除在目标用户之外方面所做的努力有限,这有可能使现有的不平等现象长期存在下去。我们还发现了监管不力的问题:我们对两款面向患者的人工智能辅助皮肤癌应用程序进行的伦理用例分析结果表明,这两款应用程序的开发和部署都没有充分纳入生物伦理规范,如公正、责任和透明度。改进监管应加强问责制。为了防止人工智能辅助皮肤癌应用程序的潜在益处被潜在的伦理危害所掩盖,迫切需要通过技术开发人员、皮肤科医生、伦理学家和公众之间的整合来确保设计的伦理性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Ethical implications of artificial intelligence in skin cancer diagnostics: use-case analyses.

Background: Skin cancer is the most common cancer worldwide. Early diagnosis is crucial for improving patient survival and morbidity. Artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted smartphone applications (apps) for skin cancer potentially offer accessible, early risk assessment of suspicious skin lesions. However, the integration of novel technologies into dermatology pathways raises ethical concerns. Although ethical principles for AI governance are well known, how these principles should be applied to real-life AI apps readily available for public use is less well understood.

Objectives: We conducted an ethical use-case analysis of commercially available skin cancer apps to better understand the ethical issues arising from their development and use in a real-world context.

Methods: Established methods for ethical analysis of clinical AI applications were applied to two popular skin cancer apps in the UK: SkinVision and Scanoma. Systematic searches of published literature, regulatory documents, and websites were conducted to review the evidence regarding app development, effectiveness, and use. Screening for inclusion was undertaken by two researchers independently. Ethical concerns were identified with reference to previously described ethical concerns and principles for AI-assisted healthcare.

Results: By conceptualising ethical principles within the use-context of skin cancer apps, we identified specific ethical issues arising throughout the AI lifecycle of both apps. One company provided extensive detail regarding algorithm development and decision-making, this information was insufficiently reported for the other app. Other concerns identified related to number, quality, and consistency of studies assessing algorithm efficacy. Limited efforts to address potential skin tone biases and exclusion of individuals with darker skin tones as target users by one app risks perpetuating existing inequalities. Inadequate regulatory oversight was identified.

Conclusions: Findings from our ethical use-case analysis of two patient-facing AI-assisted skin cancer apps suggest inadequate incorporation of bioethical norms such as justice, responsibility and transparency into the development and deployment of both apps. Improved regulation should increase accountability. Ensuring ethics by design through integration between technology developers, dermatologists, ethicists, and the public is urgently needed to prevent the potential benefits of AI-assisted skin cancer apps being overshadowed by potential ethical harms.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal of Dermatology
British Journal of Dermatology 医学-皮肤病学
CiteScore
16.30
自引率
3.90%
发文量
1062
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Dermatology (BJD) is committed to publishing the highest quality dermatological research. Through its publications, the journal seeks to advance the understanding, management, and treatment of skin diseases, ultimately aiming to improve patient outcomes.
期刊最新文献
Artificial daylight - the future for PDT in an uncertain climate? Skin microbiome dynamics in patients with polymorphic light eruption in response to UV radiations. Multitranscriptome analysis revealed that stromal cells in the papillary dermis promote angiogenesis in psoriasis vulgaris. Drug Survival and Safety of Biosimilars Compared with Originator Adalimumab for Psoriasis: A Multinational Cohort Study. R(+) Propranolol decreases lipid accumulation in haemangioma-derived stem cells.
×
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