Article info
PDFExtended essay
Medical AI, inductive risk and the communication of uncertainty: the case of disorders of consciousness
- Correspondence to Professor Jonathan Birch, Centre for Philosophy of Natural and Social Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, WC2A 2AE, UK; j.birch2{at}lse.ac.uk
Citation
Medical AI, inductive risk and the communication of uncertainty: the case of disorders of consciousness
Publication history
- Received July 12, 2023
- Accepted October 28, 2023
- First published November 18, 2023.
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)) 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- Public perceptions on the application of artificial intelligence in healthcare: a qualitative meta-synthesis
- Randomised controlled trials in medical AI: ethical considerations
- Who is afraid of black box algorithms? On the epistemological and ethical basis of trust in medical AI
- Developing, implementing and governing artificial intelligence in medicine: a step-by-step approach to prevent an artificial intelligence winter
- Trust does not need to be human: it is possible to trust medical AI
- Computer knows best? The need for value-flexibility in medical AI
- Limits of trust in medical AI
- Ethics of the algorithmic prediction of goal of care preferences: from theory to practice
- Design publicity of black box algorithms: a support to the epistemic and ethical justifications of medical AI systems
- Comparative survey among paediatricians, nurses and health information technicians on ethics implementation knowledge of and attitude towards social experiments based on medical artificial intelligence at children’s hospitals in Shanghai: a cross-sectional study