$\require{mediawiki-texvc}$

연합인증

연합인증 가입 기관의 연구자들은 소속기관의 인증정보(ID와 암호)를 이용해 다른 대학, 연구기관, 서비스 공급자의 다양한 온라인 자원과 연구 데이터를 이용할 수 있습니다.

이는 여행자가 자국에서 발행 받은 여권으로 세계 각국을 자유롭게 여행할 수 있는 것과 같습니다.

연합인증으로 이용이 가능한 서비스는 NTIS, DataON, Edison, Kafe, Webinar 등이 있습니다.

한번의 인증절차만으로 연합인증 가입 서비스에 추가 로그인 없이 이용이 가능합니다.

다만, 연합인증을 위해서는 최초 1회만 인증 절차가 필요합니다. (회원이 아닐 경우 회원 가입이 필요합니다.)

연합인증 절차는 다음과 같습니다.

최초이용시에는
ScienceON에 로그인 → 연합인증 서비스 접속 → 로그인 (본인 확인 또는 회원가입) → 서비스 이용

그 이후에는
ScienceON 로그인 → 연합인증 서비스 접속 → 서비스 이용

연합인증을 활용하시면 KISTI가 제공하는 다양한 서비스를 편리하게 이용하실 수 있습니다.

Computer knows best? The need for value-flexibility in medical AI 원문보기

Journal of medical ethics, v.45 no.3, 2019년, pp.156 - 160  

McDougall, Rosalind J

Abstract AI-Helper 아이콘AI-Helper

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being developed for use in medicine, including for diagnosis and in treatment decision making. The use of AI in medical treatment raises many ethical issues that are yet to be explored in depth by bioethicists. In this paper, I focus specifically on the r...

주제어

참고문헌 (43)

  1. O’Neill M . ABC News. Explainer: what is artificial intelligence? 2017. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-07/explainer-what-is-artificial-intelligence/8771632 (Accessed 11 Oct 2017). 

  2. Poole DL , Mackworth AK , Goebel R . Computational intelligence: a logical approach. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998. 

  3. Walsh T . It’s alive!: artificial intelligence from the logic piano to killer robots. Carlton, Vic: La Trobe University Press, 2017. 

  4. Mukherjee S. , AI versus MD . The New Yorker. 2017. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/04/03/ai-versus-md (Accessed 15 Jul 2018). 

  5. McCredie J ; MJA Insight. Artificial intelligence: augmenting or replacing doctors? 2017. https://www.doctorportal.com.au/mjainsight/2017/29/artificial-intelligence-augmenting-or-replacing-doctors/ (Accessed 20 Feb 2018). 

  6. Esteva, Andre, Kuprel, Brett, Novoa, Roberto A., Ko, Justin, Swetter, Susan M., Blau, Helen M., Thrun, Sebastian. Dermatologist-level classification of skin cancer with deep neural networks. Nature, vol.542, no.7639, 115-118.

  7. Bass D . Bloomberg. Microsoft develops AI to help cancer doctors find the right treatments. 2016. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-20/microsoft-develops-ai-to-help-cancer-doctors-find-the-right-treatments (accessed 20 Feb 2018). 

  8. IBM Watson Health. Product vignette: IBM watson for oncology. 2017. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_bi-S0XNPI (accessed 15 Jul 2018). 

  9. Clin J Oncol Nurs Doyle-Lindrud 19 31 2015 10.1188/15.CJON.31-32 Watson will see you now: a supercomputer to help clinicians make informed treatment decisions 

  10. ABC Television. The AI race. [Documentary]. Australia: ABC Television, 2017. 

  11. 10.1007/978-3-319-08108-3 : Van Rysewyk SP , Pontier M , eds. Machine medical ethics. New York: Springer, 2014. 

  12. 10.1136/bmj.i6169 

  13. N Engl J Med Char 378 981 2018 10.1056/NEJMp1714229 Implementing machine learning in health care - addressing ethical challenges 

  14. J R Soc Med Liu 111 113 2018 10.1177/0141076818762648 Time to regenerate: the doctor in the age of artificial intelligence 

  15. Computer Sharkey 46 56 2013 10.1109/MC.2012.424 Robotic surgery: on the cutting edge of ethics 

  16. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Artificial Intelligence (AI) in healthcare and research. 2018. http://nuffieldbioethics.org/project/briefing-notes/artificial-intelligence-ai-healthcare-research (Accessed 5 Jun 2018). 

  17. Fenech M , Strukelj N , Buston O . Ethical, social, and political challenges of artificial intelligence in health. 2018. https://wellcome.ac.uk/sites/default/files/ai-in-health-ethical-social-political-challenges.pdf (Accessed 5 Jun 2018). 

  18. van Wynsberghe A . Healthcare robots: ethics, design and implementation. New York: Routledge, 2015. 

  19. Emanuel, E J, Emanuel, L L. Four models of the physician-patient relationship.. JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association, vol.267, no.16, 2221-2226.

  20. Frosch, Dominick L, Kaplan, Robert M. Shared decision making in clinical medicine: past research and future directions. American journal of preventive medicine, vol.17, no.4, 285-294.

  21. Singapore Med J Chin 43 152 2002 Doctor-patient relationship: from medical paternalism to enhanced autonomy 

  22. World Medical Association. Modern physicians’ pledge approved by World Medical Association. 2017. https://www.wma.net/news-post/modern-physicians-pledge-approved-by-world-medical-association/ (Accessed 11 Dec 2017). 

  23. World Medical Association. Declaration of Geneva. https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-geneva/ (Accessed 11 Dec 2017). 

  24. Stewart M , Brown BJ , Weston WW , et al . Patient-centred medicine. transforming the clinical method. Radcliffe Medical Press: Oxford, 2006. 

  25. Charles, Cathy, Gafni, Amiram, Whelan, Tim. Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: What does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Social science & medicine, vol.44, no.5, 681-692.

  26. Brock, Dan W.. The Ideal of Shared Decision Making Between Physicians and Patients. Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal, vol.1, no.1, 28-47.

  27. Whitney SN . Near-drowning, futility, and the limits of shared decision making. In: Frankel LR , Goldworth A , Rorty MV , Silverman WA , eds. Ethical dilemmas in pediatrics: cases and commentaries. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009:95-107. 

  28. Moumjid, Nora, Gafni, Amiram, BrU00E9;mond, Alain, CarrU00E8;re, Marie-Odile. Shared Decision Making in the Medical Encounter: Are We All Talking about the Same Thing?. Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, vol.27, no.5, 539-546.

  29. Elwyn, Glyn, Frosch, Dominick, Thomson, Richard, Joseph-Williams, Natalie, Lloyd, Amy, Kinnersley, Paul, Cording, Emma, Tomson, Dave, Dodd, Carole, Rollnick, Stephen, Edwards, Adrian, Barry, Michael. Shared Decision Making: A Model for Clinical Practice. Journal of general internal medicine : official journal of the Society for Research and Education in Primary Care Internal Medicine, vol.27, no.10, 1361-1367.

  30. Frankel LR , Goldworth A , Rorty MV , Silverman WA , et al . eds. Ethical dilemmas in pediatrics: cases and commentaries. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009. 

  31. Gillick, Muriel R. Re-engineering shared decision-making. Journal of medical ethics, vol.41, no.9, 785-788.

  32. Goodman KW . Ethical and legal issues in decision support. Berner ES , ed. Clinical decision support systems: Theory and Practice. 2nd edn. New York: Springer, 2007:126-39. 

  33. Foundation for Responsible Robotics. Responsible robotics. https://responsiblerobotics.org/ (accessed 22 Feb 2018). 

  34. Partnership on Artificial Intelligence. Partnership on artificial intelligence to benefit people and society. https://www.partnershiponai.org/ (accessed 22 Feb 2018). 

  35. DeepMind Technologies Ltd. DeepMind ethics & society. https://deepmind.com/applied/deepmind-ethics-society/ (accessed 22 Feb 2018). 

  36. 10.24963/ijcai.2017/655 Dignum V . Responsible autonomy. In: Carles S , ed. Proceedings of the twenty-sixth international joint conference on artificial intelligence, 19-25 August 2017. Melbourne, Australia. 

  37. Bostrom N , Yudkowsky E . The ethics of artificial intelligence. In: Ramsey W , Frankish K , eds. The Cambridge handbook of artificial intelligence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2014:316-34. 

  38. Friedman B , Kahn P , Borning A . Value sensitive design and information systems. In: Himma KE , Tavani HT , eds. The handbook of information and computer ethics. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2008:69-101. 

  39. Couët, Nicolas, Desroches, Sophie, Robitaille, Hubert, Vaillancourt, Hugues, Leblanc, Annie, Turcotte, Stéphane, Elwyn, Glyn, Légaré, France. Assessments of the extent to which health‐care providers involve patients in decision making: a systematic review of studies using the OPTION instrument. Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, vol.18, no.4, 542-561.

  40. Artif Intell Med Sacchi 65 19 2015 10.1016/j.artmed.2014.10.004 From decision to shared-decision: Introducing patients' preferences into clinical decision analysis 

  41. Ruland, Cornelia M., Bakken, Suzanne. Developing, implementing, and evaluating decision support systems for shared decision making in patient care: a conceptual model and case illustration. Journal of biomedical informatics, vol.35, no.5, 313-321.

  42. Borning A , Friedman B , Davis J , et al . Informing public deliberation: value sensitive design of indicators for a large-scale urban simulation. Proceedings of the 9th European conference of computer-supported co-operative work. Paris, France, 2005. 

  43. de Dombal, F T. Ethical considerations concerning computers in medicine in the 1980s.. Journal of medical ethics, vol.13, no.4, 179-184.

관련 콘텐츠

오픈액세스(OA) 유형

GOLD(Hybrid)

저자가 APC(Article Processing Charge)를 지불한 논문에 한하여 자유로운 이용이 가능한, hybrid 저널에 출판된 논문

섹션별 컨텐츠 바로가기

AI-Helper ※ AI-Helper는 오픈소스 모델을 사용합니다.

AI-Helper 아이콘
AI-Helper
안녕하세요, AI-Helper입니다. 좌측 "선택된 텍스트"에서 텍스트를 선택하여 요약, 번역, 용어설명을 실행하세요.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.

선택된 텍스트

맨위로