The Ethical Implications of AI in Healthcare

dc.contributor.advisorRini, Regina
dc.contributor.authorHirmiz, Rand
dc.date.accessioned2024-11-07T11:09:09Z
dc.date.available2024-11-07T11:09:09Z
dc.date.copyright2024-07-30
dc.date.issued2024-11-07
dc.date.updated2024-11-07T11:09:09Z
dc.degree.disciplinePhilosophy
dc.degree.levelDoctoral
dc.degree.namePhD - Doctor of Philosophy
dc.description.abstractThis dissertation focuses on the ethical implications of implementing artificial intelligence in healthcare. Three approaches are considered regarding the role that artificial intelligence ought to play in healthcare: 1. the neo-luddite approach, which urges against the implementation of artificial intelligence in healthcare altogether; 2. The substitutive approach, which favours the goal of ultimately substituting artificial intelligence systems for human clinicians; and 3. The assistive approach, which favours the implementation of artificial intelligence systems in healthcare, but only as a tool to assist, rather than replace, human clinicians. The dissertation begins by looking at what excellence in the practice of medicine entails and deriving some formal duties of clinician, before proceeding to assess the risks or threats that different approaches to the use of AI may pose to the practice. The first position evaluated is the neo-luddite approach. In evaluating this approach, some arguments in its favour are considered, including worries regarding biased algorithms, decreased communication with patients, confidentiality, the resurgence of paternalism, the potential for unethical design, overdependence on AI, and inscrutability. After responding to these concerns and rejecting the neo-luddite approach, the dissertation shifts its focus on to the assistive and substitutive approaches. Before evaluating these two approaches, the concepts of “assistance” and “substitution” are analyzed and definitions of assistive and substitutive technology are provided. With these definitions at hand, the remaining two approaches are assessed, beginning with the substitutive approach, which is then rejected for reasons related to both AI’s limited capacity to foster a strong patient-clinician relationship (due to its limited capacity for compassion, recognition, communication, creating trust, and respecting patient autonomy) and concerns on a more systemic level (including its likelihood to cause responsibility gaps and produce erroneous and biased decisions). The final part of the dissertation focuses on the assistive approach. Issues related to clinician-AI disagreement and the use of opaque decision support systems are addressed and recommendations for handling these issues (derived after a discussion of the epistemic role of assistive AI) are provided. The dissertation concludes with the recommendation that the assistive approach offers a superior outlook for the future of medicine.
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10315/42451
dc.languageen
dc.rightsAuthor owns copyright, except where explicitly noted. Please contact the author directly with licensing requests.
dc.subjectArtificial intelligence
dc.subjectMedical ethics
dc.subjectPhilosophy
dc.subject.keywordsArtificial intelligence
dc.subject.keywordsAI ethics
dc.subject.keywordsHealthcare ethics
dc.subject.keywordsMedical ethics
dc.subject.keywordsBioethics
dc.subject.keywordsSubstitutive AI
dc.subject.keywordsAssistive AI
dc.subject.keywordsSpistemic role of AI
dc.subject.keywordsResponsibility gaps
dc.subject.keywordsBlack box
dc.titleThe Ethical Implications of AI in Healthcare
dc.typeElectronic Thesis or Dissertation

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Hirmiz_Rand_2024_PhD.pdf
Size:
945.06 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.87 KB
Format:
Plain Text
Description:
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
YorkU_ETDlicense.txt
Size:
3.39 KB
Format:
Plain Text
Description:

Collections