手术知情同意的大型语言模型:模拟同理心的伦理视角。

IF 4.4 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Journal of Medical Ethics Pub Date : 2026-01-22 DOI:10.1136/jme-2024-110652
Pranab Rudra, Wolf-Tilo Balke, Tim Kacprowski, Frank Ursin, Sabine Salloch
{"title":"手术知情同意的大型语言模型:模拟同理心的伦理视角。","authors":"Pranab Rudra, Wolf-Tilo Balke, Tim Kacprowski, Frank Ursin, Sabine Salloch","doi":"10.1136/jme-2024-110652","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Informed consent in surgical settings requires not only the accurate communication of medical information but also the establishment of trust through empathic engagement. The use of large language models (LLMs) offers a novel opportunity to enhance the informed consent process by combining advanced information retrieval capabilities with simulated emotional responsiveness. However, the ethical implications of simulated empathy raise concerns about patient autonomy, trust and transparency. This paper examines the challenges of surgical informed consent, the potential benefits and limitations of digital tools such as LLMs and the ethical implications of simulated empathy. We distinguish between active empathy, which carries the risk of creating a misleading illusion of emotional connection and passive empathy, which focuses on recognising and signalling patient distress cues, such as fear or uncertainty, rather than attempting to simulate genuine empathy. We argue that LLMs should be limited to the latter, recognising and signalling patient distress cues and alerting healthcare providers to patient anxiety. This approach preserves the authenticity of human empathy while leveraging the analytical strengths of LLMs to assist surgeons in addressing patient concerns. This paper highlights how LLMs can ethically enhance the informed consent process without undermining the relational integrity essential to patient-centred care. By maintaining transparency and respecting the irreplaceable role of human empathy, LLMs can serve as valuable tools to support, rather than replace, the relational trust essential to informed consent.</p>","PeriodicalId":16317,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"85-90"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12911618/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Large language models for surgical informed consent: an ethical perspective on simulated empathy.\",\"authors\":\"Pranab Rudra, Wolf-Tilo Balke, Tim Kacprowski, Frank Ursin, Sabine Salloch\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/jme-2024-110652\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Informed consent in surgical settings requires not only the accurate communication of medical information but also the establishment of trust through empathic engagement. The use of large language models (LLMs) offers a novel opportunity to enhance the informed consent process by combining advanced information retrieval capabilities with simulated emotional responsiveness. However, the ethical implications of simulated empathy raise concerns about patient autonomy, trust and transparency. This paper examines the challenges of surgical informed consent, the potential benefits and limitations of digital tools such as LLMs and the ethical implications of simulated empathy. We distinguish between active empathy, which carries the risk of creating a misleading illusion of emotional connection and passive empathy, which focuses on recognising and signalling patient distress cues, such as fear or uncertainty, rather than attempting to simulate genuine empathy. We argue that LLMs should be limited to the latter, recognising and signalling patient distress cues and alerting healthcare providers to patient anxiety. This approach preserves the authenticity of human empathy while leveraging the analytical strengths of LLMs to assist surgeons in addressing patient concerns. This paper highlights how LLMs can ethically enhance the informed consent process without undermining the relational integrity essential to patient-centred care. By maintaining transparency and respecting the irreplaceable role of human empathy, LLMs can serve as valuable tools to support, rather than replace, the relational trust essential to informed consent.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16317,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Ethics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"85-90\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-01-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12911618/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2024-110652\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2024-110652","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

手术环境中的知情同意不仅需要医疗信息的准确沟通,还需要通过移情参与建立信任。大型语言模型(llm)的使用通过将先进的信息检索能力与模拟的情绪反应相结合,为增强知情同意过程提供了一个新的机会。然而,模拟共情的伦理含义引发了对患者自主权、信任和透明度的担忧。本文探讨了手术知情同意的挑战,法学硕士等数字工具的潜在好处和局限性,以及模拟同理心的伦理含义。我们将主动共情和被动共情区分开来。主动共情有可能制造一种误导性的情感联系幻觉,而被动共情侧重于识别和发出病人痛苦的信号,比如恐惧或不确定,而不是试图模拟真正的共情。我们认为,法学硕士应限于后者,识别和信号患者的痛苦线索,并提醒医疗保健提供者对患者的焦虑。这种方法保留了人类同理心的真实性,同时利用法学硕士的分析优势来帮助外科医生解决患者的问题。本文强调了法学硕士如何在不破坏以患者为中心的护理所必需的关系完整性的情况下,从道德上加强知情同意过程。通过保持透明度和尊重人类同理心不可替代的作用,法学硕士可以作为有价值的工具,支持而不是取代对知情同意至关重要的关系信任。
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
Large language models for surgical informed consent: an ethical perspective on simulated empathy.

Informed consent in surgical settings requires not only the accurate communication of medical information but also the establishment of trust through empathic engagement. The use of large language models (LLMs) offers a novel opportunity to enhance the informed consent process by combining advanced information retrieval capabilities with simulated emotional responsiveness. However, the ethical implications of simulated empathy raise concerns about patient autonomy, trust and transparency. This paper examines the challenges of surgical informed consent, the potential benefits and limitations of digital tools such as LLMs and the ethical implications of simulated empathy. We distinguish between active empathy, which carries the risk of creating a misleading illusion of emotional connection and passive empathy, which focuses on recognising and signalling patient distress cues, such as fear or uncertainty, rather than attempting to simulate genuine empathy. We argue that LLMs should be limited to the latter, recognising and signalling patient distress cues and alerting healthcare providers to patient anxiety. This approach preserves the authenticity of human empathy while leveraging the analytical strengths of LLMs to assist surgeons in addressing patient concerns. This paper highlights how LLMs can ethically enhance the informed consent process without undermining the relational integrity essential to patient-centred care. By maintaining transparency and respecting the irreplaceable role of human empathy, LLMs can serve as valuable tools to support, rather than replace, the relational trust essential to informed consent.

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
Journal of Medical Ethics
Journal of Medical Ethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.80%
发文量
164
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Ethics is a leading international journal that reflects the whole field of medical ethics. The journal seeks to promote ethical reflection and conduct in scientific research and medical practice. It features articles on various ethical aspects of health care relevant to health care professionals, members of clinical ethics committees, medical ethics professionals, researchers and bioscientists, policy makers and patients. Subscribers to the Journal of Medical Ethics also receive Medical Humanities journal at no extra cost. JME is the official journal of the Institute of Medical Ethics.
期刊最新文献
Not all personal utilities are equal: a two-tier normative framework for genomic health technology assessment. Harms of the current global anti-FGM campaign. Correction: Harms of the current global anti-FGM campaign. Emergent ethics of xenotransplantation: findings from a survey on public attitudes toward animal to human organ transplantation in the UK. Is sport in the 'public interest'? Towards a legal and ethical framework for justifying sport-related harm.
×
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