The right to a second opinion on Artificial Intelligence diagnosis—Remedying the inadequacy of a risk-based regulation
In this paper, we argue that patients who are subjects of Artificial Intelligence (AI)-supported diagnosis and treatment planning should have a right to a second opinion, but also that this right should not necessarily be construed as a right to a physician opinion. The right to a second opinion cou...
Authors: | ; |
---|---|
Format: | Electronic Article |
Language: | English |
Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Published: |
Wiley-Blackwell
2023
|
In: |
Bioethics
Year: 2023, Volume: 37, Issue: 3, Pages: 303-311 |
RelBib Classification: | NCH Medical ethics NCJ Ethics of science XA Law |
Further subjects: | B
AI regulation
B AI rights B Artificial Intelligence B second opinion B AI risks |
Online Access: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
MARC
LEADER | 00000caa a22000002 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | 1836297084 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230418211802.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 230216s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1111/bioe.13124 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)1836297084 | ||
035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1836297084 | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
084 | |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
100 | 1 | |a Ploug, Thomas |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 4 | |a The right to a second opinion on Artificial Intelligence diagnosis—Remedying the inadequacy of a risk-based regulation |
264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a In this paper, we argue that patients who are subjects of Artificial Intelligence (AI)-supported diagnosis and treatment planning should have a right to a second opinion, but also that this right should not necessarily be construed as a right to a physician opinion. The right to a second opinion could potentially be satisfied by another independent AI system. Our considerations on the right to second opinion are embedded in the wider debate on different approaches to the regulation of AI, and we conclude the article by providing a number of reasons for preferring a rights-based approach over a risk-based approach. | ||
650 | 4 | |a second opinion | |
650 | 4 | |a Artificial Intelligence | |
650 | 4 | |a AI risks | |
650 | 4 | |a AI rights | |
650 | 4 | |a AI regulation | |
652 | |a NCH:NCJ:XA | ||
700 | 1 | |e VerfasserIn |0 (DE-588)101688954 |0 (DE-627)630198322 |0 (DE-576)325227624 |4 aut |a Holm, Søren |d 1901-1971 | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Bioethics |d Oxford [u.a.] : Wiley-Blackwell, 1987 |g 37(2023), 3, Seite 303-311 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)271596708 |w (DE-600)1480658-7 |w (DE-576)078707986 |x 1467-8519 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:37 |g year:2023 |g number:3 |g pages:303-311 |
856 | |u https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/bioe.13124 |x unpaywall |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang |h publisher [open (via crossref license)] | ||
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13124 |x Resolving-System |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/bioe.13124 |x Verlag |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
935 | |a mteo | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
ELC | |a 1 | ||
ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
LOK | |0 001 427271483X | ||
LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
LOK | |0 004 1836297084 | ||
LOK | |0 005 20230418211802 | ||
LOK | |0 008 230216||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
LOK | |0 035 |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2023-02-15#DC6D1C1B21DF724CA4AB110476659738A455C060 | ||
LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a zota | ||
LOK | |0 936ln |0 1550736558 |a NCH | ||
LOK | |0 936ln |0 1550736582 |a NCJ | ||
LOK | |0 936ln |0 1442053798 |a XA | ||
OAS | |a 1 | ||
ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||
REL | |a 1 | ||
SUB | |a REL |