Article info
PDFFeature article
Responsibility, second opinions and peer-disagreement: ethical and epistemological challenges of using AI in clinical diagnostic contexts
- Correspondence to Mr Hendrik Kempt, Applied Ethics Group, RWTH Aachen University, 52056 Aachen, Germany; hendrik.kempt{at}humtec.rwth-aachen.de
Citation
Responsibility, second opinions and peer-disagreement: ethical and epistemological challenges of using AI in clinical diagnostic contexts
Publication history
- Received March 31, 2021
- Accepted November 29, 2021
- First published December 14, 2021.
Online issue publication
May 04, 2022
Article Versions
- Previous version (23 March 2022).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- Agree to disagree: the symmetry of burden of proof in human–AI collaboration
- Are physicians requesting a second opinion really engaging in a reason-giving dialectic? Normative questions on the standards for second opinions and AI
- Second opinion programmes in Germany: a mixed-methods study protocol
- Evaluation of 12 strategies for obtaining second opinions to improve interpretation of breast histopathology: simulation study
- Characteristics associated with requests by pathologists for second opinions on breast biopsies
- Second opinion in breast pathology: policy, practice and perception
- Second opinion utilization by healthcare insurance type in a mixed private-public healthcare system: a population-based study
- Patient-initiated second medical consultations—patient characteristics and motivating factors, impact on care and satisfaction: a systematic review
- AI decision-support: a dystopian future of machine paternalism?
- Responsibility and decision-making authority in using clinical decision support systems: an empirical-ethical exploration of German prospective professionals’ preferences and concerns