Article info
PDFResponse
Materiality and practicality: a response to - are clinicians ethically obligated to disclose their use of medical machine learning systems to patients?
- Correspondence to Dr Michal Pruski, Cardiff and Vale UHB, Cardiff, CF14 4XW, UK; michal.pruski{at}postgrad.manchester.ac.uk
Citation
Materiality and practicality: a response to - are clinicians ethically obligated to disclose their use of medical machine learning systems to patients?
Publication history
- Received August 12, 2024
- Accepted August 23, 2024
- First published August 30, 2024.
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)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- Designing AI for mental health diagnosis: challenges from sub-Saharan African value-laden judgements on mental health disorders
- Testimonial injustice in medical machine learning
- Grand rounds in methodology: key considerations for implementing machine learning solutions in quality improvement initiatives
- Are clinicians ethically obligated to disclose their use of medical machine learning systems to patients?
- Machine learning for mental health diagnosis: tackling contributory injustice and epistemic oppression
- Role of artificial intelligence in defibrillators: a narrative review
- Machine learning in the assessment and management of acute gastrointestinal bleeding
- Can medical algorithms be fair? Three ethical quandaries and one dilemma
- Artificial intelligence, bias and clinical safety
- Negotiating cultural sensitivity in medical AI