4.5 Article

Co-design and ethical artificial intelligence for health: An agenda for critical research and practice

期刊

BIG DATA & SOCIETY
卷 8, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/20539517211065248

关键词

Co-design; participatory design; artificial intelligence; health care; design ethics; data ethics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of AI/ML in healthcare is growing rapidly, making patient and public involvement in the design of these technologies more crucial. However, there are challenges and limitations to co-design as a strategy due to the introduction of new technologies like AI/ML. These new technologies have amplified and modified existing challenges related to patient and public involvement, creating the need to address both old and new issues.
Applications of artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML) in health care are dynamic and rapidly growing. One strategy for anticipating and addressing ethical challenges related to AI/ML for health care is patient and public involvement in the design of those technologies - often referred to as 'co-design'. Co-design has a diverse intellectual and practical history, however, and has been conceptualized in many different ways. Moreover, AI/ML introduces challenges to co-design that are often underappreciated. Informed by perspectives from critical data studies and critical digital health studies, we review the research literature on involvement in health care, and involvement in design, and examine the extent to which co-design as commonly conceptualized is capable of addressing the range of normative issues raised by AI/ML for health care. We suggest that AI/ML technologies have amplified and modified existing challenges related to patient and public involvement, and created entirely new challenges. We outline three pitfalls associated with co-design for ethical AI/ML for health care and conclude with suggestions for addressing these practical and conceptual challenges.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据