Evaluation of artificial intelligence clinical applications: Detailed case analyses show value of healthcare ethics approach in identifying patient care issues

This paper is one of the first to analyse the ethical implications of specific healthcare artificial intelligence (AI) applications, and the first to provide a detailed analysis of AI‐based systems for clinical decision support. AI is increasingly being deployed across multiple domains. In response,...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Bioethics Jg. 35; H. 7; S. 623 - 633
Hauptverfasser: Rogers, Wendy A., Draper, Heather, Carter, Stacy M.
Format: Journal Article
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: England Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.09.2021
Schlagworte:
ISSN:0269-9702, 1467-8519, 1467-8519
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Abstract This paper is one of the first to analyse the ethical implications of specific healthcare artificial intelligence (AI) applications, and the first to provide a detailed analysis of AI‐based systems for clinical decision support. AI is increasingly being deployed across multiple domains. In response, a plethora of ethical guidelines and principles for general AI use have been published, with some convergence about which ethical concepts are relevant to this new technology. However, few of these frameworks are healthcare‐specific, and there has been limited examination of actual AI applications in healthcare. Our ethical evaluation identifies context‐ and case‐specific healthcare ethical issues for two applications, and investigates the extent to which the general ethical principles for AI‐assisted healthcare expressed in existing frameworks capture what is most ethically relevant from the perspective of healthcare ethics. We provide a detailed description and analysis of two AI‐based systems for clinical decision support (Painchek® and IDx‐DR). Our results identify ethical challenges associated with potentially deceptive promissory claims, lack of patient and public involvement in healthcare AI development and deployment, and lack of attention to the impact of AIs on healthcare relationships. Our analysis also highlights the close connection between evaluation and technical development and reporting. Critical appraisal frameworks for healthcare AIs should include explicit ethical evaluation with benchmarks. However, each application will require scrutiny across the AI life‐cycle to identify ethical issues specific to healthcare. This level of analysis requires more attention to detail than is suggested by current ethical guidance or frameworks.
AbstractList This paper is one of the first to analyse the ethical implications of specific healthcare artificial intelligence (AI) applications, and the first to provide a detailed analysis of AI‐based systems for clinical decision support. AI is increasingly being deployed across multiple domains. In response, a plethora of ethical guidelines and principles for general AI use have been published, with some convergence about which ethical concepts are relevant to this new technology. However, few of these frameworks are healthcare‐specific, and there has been limited examination of actual AI applications in healthcare. Our ethical evaluation identifies context‐ and case‐specific healthcare ethical issues for two applications, and investigates the extent to which the general ethical principles for AI‐assisted healthcare expressed in existing frameworks capture what is most ethically relevant from the perspective of healthcare ethics. We provide a detailed description and analysis of two AI‐based systems for clinical decision support (Painchek ® and IDx‐DR). Our results identify ethical challenges associated with potentially deceptive promissory claims, lack of patient and public involvement in healthcare AI development and deployment, and lack of attention to the impact of AIs on healthcare relationships. Our analysis also highlights the close connection between evaluation and technical development and reporting. Critical appraisal frameworks for healthcare AIs should include explicit ethical evaluation with benchmarks. However, each application will require scrutiny across the AI life‐cycle to identify ethical issues specific to healthcare. This level of analysis requires more attention to detail than is suggested by current ethical guidance or frameworks.
This paper is one of the first to analyse the ethical implications of specific healthcare artificial intelligence (AI) applications, and the first to provide a detailed analysis of AI-based systems for clinical decision support. AI is increasingly being deployed across multiple domains. In response, a plethora of ethical guidelines and principles for general AI use have been published, with some convergence about which ethical concepts are relevant to this new technology. However, few of these frameworks are healthcare-specific, and there has been limited examination of actual AI applications in healthcare. Our ethical evaluation identifies context- and case-specific healthcare ethical issues for two applications, and investigates the extent to which the general ethical principles for AI-assisted healthcare expressed in existing frameworks capture what is most ethically relevant from the perspective of healthcare ethics. We provide a detailed description and analysis of two AI-based systems for clinical decision support (Painchek® and IDx-DR). Our results identify ethical challenges associated with potentially deceptive promissory claims, lack of patient and public involvement in healthcare AI development and deployment, and lack of attention to the impact of AIs on healthcare relationships. Our analysis also highlights the close connection between evaluation and technical development and reporting. Critical appraisal frameworks for healthcare AIs should include explicit ethical evaluation with benchmarks. However, each application will require scrutiny across the AI life-cycle to identify ethical issues specific to healthcare. This level of analysis requires more attention to detail than is suggested by current ethical guidance or frameworks.This paper is one of the first to analyse the ethical implications of specific healthcare artificial intelligence (AI) applications, and the first to provide a detailed analysis of AI-based systems for clinical decision support. AI is increasingly being deployed across multiple domains. In response, a plethora of ethical guidelines and principles for general AI use have been published, with some convergence about which ethical concepts are relevant to this new technology. However, few of these frameworks are healthcare-specific, and there has been limited examination of actual AI applications in healthcare. Our ethical evaluation identifies context- and case-specific healthcare ethical issues for two applications, and investigates the extent to which the general ethical principles for AI-assisted healthcare expressed in existing frameworks capture what is most ethically relevant from the perspective of healthcare ethics. We provide a detailed description and analysis of two AI-based systems for clinical decision support (Painchek® and IDx-DR). Our results identify ethical challenges associated with potentially deceptive promissory claims, lack of patient and public involvement in healthcare AI development and deployment, and lack of attention to the impact of AIs on healthcare relationships. Our analysis also highlights the close connection between evaluation and technical development and reporting. Critical appraisal frameworks for healthcare AIs should include explicit ethical evaluation with benchmarks. However, each application will require scrutiny across the AI life-cycle to identify ethical issues specific to healthcare. This level of analysis requires more attention to detail than is suggested by current ethical guidance or frameworks.
This paper is one of the first to analyse the ethical implications of specific healthcare artificial intelligence (AI) applications, and the first to provide a detailed analysis of AI‐based systems for clinical decision support. AI is increasingly being deployed across multiple domains. In response, a plethora of ethical guidelines and principles for general AI use have been published, with some convergence about which ethical concepts are relevant to this new technology. However, few of these frameworks are healthcare‐specific, and there has been limited examination of actual AI applications in healthcare. Our ethical evaluation identifies context‐ and case‐specific healthcare ethical issues for two applications, and investigates the extent to which the general ethical principles for AI‐assisted healthcare expressed in existing frameworks capture what is most ethically relevant from the perspective of healthcare ethics. We provide a detailed description and analysis of two AI‐based systems for clinical decision support (Painchek® and IDx‐DR). Our results identify ethical challenges associated with potentially deceptive promissory claims, lack of patient and public involvement in healthcare AI development and deployment, and lack of attention to the impact of AIs on healthcare relationships. Our analysis also highlights the close connection between evaluation and technical development and reporting. Critical appraisal frameworks for healthcare AIs should include explicit ethical evaluation with benchmarks. However, each application will require scrutiny across the AI life‐cycle to identify ethical issues specific to healthcare. This level of analysis requires more attention to detail than is suggested by current ethical guidance or frameworks.
This paper is one of the first to analyse the ethical implications of specific healthcare artificial intelligence (AI) applications, and the first to provide a detailed analysis of AI-based systems for clinical decision support. AI is increasingly being deployed across multiple domains. In response, a plethora of ethical guidelines and principles for general AI use have been published, with some convergence about which ethical concepts are relevant to this new technology. However, few of these frameworks are healthcare-specific, and there has been limited examination of actual AI applications in healthcare. Our ethical evaluation identifies context- and case-specific healthcare ethical issues for two applications, and investigates the extent to which the general ethical principles for AI-assisted healthcare expressed in existing frameworks capture what is most ethically relevant from the perspective of healthcare ethics. We provide a detailed description and analysis of two AI-based systems for clinical decision support (Painchek and IDx-DR). Our results identify ethical challenges associated with potentially deceptive promissory claims, lack of patient and public involvement in healthcare AI development and deployment, and lack of attention to the impact of AIs on healthcare relationships. Our analysis also highlights the close connection between evaluation and technical development and reporting. Critical appraisal frameworks for healthcare AIs should include explicit ethical evaluation with benchmarks. However, each application will require scrutiny across the AI life-cycle to identify ethical issues specific to healthcare. This level of analysis requires more attention to detail than is suggested by current ethical guidance or frameworks.
Author Rogers, Wendy A.
Draper, Heather
Carter, Stacy M.
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Wendy A.
  orcidid: 0000-0001-9186-870X
  surname: Rogers
  fullname: Rogers, Wendy A.
  email: Wendy.rogers@mq.edu.au
  organization: Macquarie University
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Heather
  orcidid: 0000-0002-0020-4252
  surname: Draper
  fullname: Draper, Heather
  organization: University of Warwick
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Stacy M.
  orcidid: 0000-0003-2617-8694
  surname: Carter
  fullname: Carter, Stacy M.
  organization: University of Wollongong
BackLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34046918$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNp9kc9u1DAQxi1URLeFCw-ALHFBSCl2HCcxNygLVKrUC5ytWWfSuPI6i51Q7dPwqkx220uFmIv_6DffZ39zxk7iGJGx11JcSKoPGz_ihSzbVj9jK1nVTdFqaU7YSpS1KUwjylN2lvOdoDJav2CnqhJVbWS7Yn_WvyHMMPkx8rHnkCbfe-chcB8nDMHfYnTIXfDRO7qF3S7QZuHzR_4FJ_ABO-4gI4cIYZ8x8zyM93zRxUVzQAjT4CAhx2nwLi8iaQQ3kAf3HUby3Pt4y3ekSyd-YH3OM-aX7HkPIeOrh_Wc_fy6_nH5vbi--XZ1-em6cMooXfTSbFoUrVFYGVBO9SgqXXcNSqWgb4U0utEgug7aDVVZNQKw1F0lalSlVufs3VGXXvaLfCe79dlRABBxnLMlpKqlampF6Nsn6N04J_r7QtVkVepWEPXmgZo3W-zsLvktpL19jJ4AcQRcGnNO2Fvnp0OwU6JQrRR2ma5dpmsP06WW909aHlX_CcsjfE8T2v-HtJ-vbtbHnr-zAbfF
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_1080_17483107_2024_2351495
crossref_primary_10_62610_RJOR_2025_1_17_82
crossref_primary_10_1108_EJIM_01_2024_0078
crossref_primary_10_1080_23311975_2025_2551809
crossref_primary_10_1007_s12687_023_00678_4
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jjcc_2021_10_016
crossref_primary_10_3390_jcm14144984
crossref_primary_10_1001_jamanetworkopen_2025_17204
crossref_primary_10_1007_s12369_023_00980_8
crossref_primary_10_3390_ijerph20156499
crossref_primary_10_1007_s11912_023_01376_7
crossref_primary_10_1111_1467_9566_70055
crossref_primary_10_3390_jpm14050443
crossref_primary_10_1007_s44206_024_00121_2
crossref_primary_10_2139_ssrn_5250701
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_imu_2024_101587
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_waojou_2025_101078
crossref_primary_10_1007_s11019_024_10222_x
crossref_primary_10_1093_jamia_ocac006
crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pdig_0000514
crossref_primary_10_1007_s43681_023_00324_2
crossref_primary_10_1177_08404704241291226
crossref_primary_10_1007_s10559_024_00736_w
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_chb_2022_107296
crossref_primary_10_1007_s11023_021_09579_2
crossref_primary_10_1007_s43681_023_00387_1
crossref_primary_10_3390_healthcare13161972
crossref_primary_10_1093_bjd_ljae434
crossref_primary_10_2196_48633
crossref_primary_10_56083_RCV5N8_071
crossref_primary_10_1109_ACCESS_2024_3501332
crossref_primary_10_1007_s40670_023_01815_x
crossref_primary_10_3390_ph18060788
crossref_primary_10_3390_healthcare11070975
crossref_primary_10_25118_2763_9037_2024_v14_1318
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
2021. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Copyright_xml – notice: 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
– notice: 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
– notice: 2021. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
DBID AAYXX
CITATION
CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
7QJ
8BJ
FQK
JBE
K9.
7X8
DOI 10.1111/bioe.12885
DatabaseName CrossRef
Medline
MEDLINE
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE
MEDLINE
PubMed
Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)
International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)
International Bibliography of the Social Sciences
International Bibliography of the Social Sciences
ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitle CrossRef
MEDLINE
Medline Complete
MEDLINE with Full Text
PubMed
MEDLINE (Ovid)
International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)
ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)
Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA)
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList CrossRef
MEDLINE - Academic

International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)
MEDLINE
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 2
  dbid: 7X8
  name: MEDLINE - Academic
  url: https://search.proquest.com/medline
  sourceTypes: Aggregation Database
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Medicine
Biology
Philosophy
EISSN 1467-8519
EndPage 633
ExternalDocumentID 34046918
10_1111_bioe_12885
BIOE12885
Genre article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Journal Article
GrantInformation_xml – fundername: Canadian Institute for Advanced Research
– fundername: National Health and Medical Research Council
  funderid: 1181960
GroupedDBID ---
--Z
-ET
.3N
.GA
.GJ
.Y3
04C
05W
0R~
10A
186
1OB
1OC
23N
31~
33P
36B
3O-
4.4
44B
50Y
50Z
51W
51Y
52M
52O
52Q
52R
52S
52T
52U
52V
52W
53G
5GY
5HH
5LA
5VS
66C
6J9
6PF
702
7PT
8-0
8-1
8-3
8-4
8-5
8UM
930
A01
A04
AABCJ
AABNI
AAESR
AAHHS
AAHQN
AAIPD
AAKAS
AAMNL
AANHP
AAONW
AAOUF
AASGY
AAWTL
AAXRX
AAYCA
AAZKR
ABCQN
ABCUV
ABDBF
ABEML
ABIVO
ABJNI
ABLJU
ABPPZ
ABPVW
ABQWH
ABSOO
ABTAH
ABXGK
ACAHQ
ACBKW
ACBWZ
ACCFJ
ACCZN
ACFBH
ACGFO
ACGFS
ACGOF
ACHQT
ACJZB
ACMXC
ACPOU
ACPRK
ACRPL
ACSCC
ACUHS
ACXQS
ACYXJ
ADBBV
ADBTR
ADEMA
ADEOM
ADIZJ
ADKYN
ADMGS
ADMHG
ADNMO
ADOJX
ADXAS
ADZCM
ADZMN
ADZOD
AEEZP
AEGXH
AEIGN
AEIMD
AENEX
AEQDE
AEUQT
AEUYR
AFBPY
AFEBI
AFFNX
AFFPM
AFGKR
AFKFF
AFPWT
AFWVQ
AFYRF
AFZJQ
AHBTC
AHEFC
AHMBA
AIACR
AIAGR
AIFKG
AIURR
AIWBW
AJBDE
ALAGY
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
ALUQN
ALVPJ
AMBMR
AMYDB
ASPBG
ASTYK
AVWKF
AZBYB
AZFZN
AZVAB
BAFTC
BDRZF
BFHJK
BMSDO
BMXJE
BNVMJ
BQESF
BROTX
BRXPI
BY8
CAG
COF
CS3
D-6
D-7
D-C
D-D
DC6
DCZOG
DPXWK
DR2
DRFUL
DRMAN
DRSSH
DU5
EAD
EAP
EAS
EBC
EBD
EBS
ECF
ECT
ECV
EHE
EIHBH
EJD
EMB
EMK
EMOBN
ENC
EPT
ESX
F00
F01
F5P
FEDTE
FUBAC
FZ0
G-S
G.N
G50
GODZA
GXZFM
HGLYW
HVGLF
HZI
HZ~
H~9
IHE
IX1
J0M
KBYEO
LATKE
LC2
LC4
LEEKS
LH4
LITHE
LOXES
LP6
LP7
LUTES
LW6
LYRES
MEWTI
MK4
MRFUL
MRMAN
MRSSH
MSFUL
MSMAN
MSSSH
MVM
MXFUL
MXMAN
MXSSH
N04
N06
N9A
NF~
O66
O9-
OIG
OVD
P2P
P2W
P2Y
P2Z
P4B
P4C
PALCI
PQQKQ
Q.N
Q11
QB0
Q~Q
R.K
RIWAO
RJQFR
ROL
RWL
RX1
RXW
SAMSI
SUPJJ
SV3
TAE
TEORI
TN5
TUS
UB1
UPT
V8K
W8V
W99
WBKPD
WGLLI
WH7
WIH
WII
WIJ
WOHZO
WQ9
WQZ
WRC
WSUWO
WXI
WXSBR
XG1
XJT
XSW
YCJ
YUY
ZGI
ZY4
ZZTAW
~IA
~WP
AAMMB
AAYXX
ABUFD
AEFGJ
AETEA
AEYWJ
AGHNM
AGQPQ
AGXDD
AIDQK
AIDYY
AIQQE
CITATION
O8X
CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
7QJ
8BJ
FQK
JBE
K9.
7X8
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c3935-f19b8e0893e49a3c3fe0456d7e133af8019575a0dda8bbbb2470ae25d406e3253
IEDL.DBID DRFUL
ISICitedReferencesCount 36
ISICitedReferencesURI http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000655470900001&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
ISSN 0269-9702
1467-8519
IngestDate Thu Oct 02 09:55:38 EDT 2025
Sat Nov 08 23:37:41 EST 2025
Thu Apr 03 06:59:48 EDT 2025
Sat Nov 29 02:38:09 EST 2025
Tue Nov 18 21:11:19 EST 2025
Wed Jan 22 16:27:55 EST 2025
IsDoiOpenAccess false
IsOpenAccess true
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 7
Keywords ethical evaluation
AI applications in healthcare
ethics of new technologies
artificial Intelligence
healthcare ethics
ethical frameworks
Language English
License 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c3935-f19b8e0893e49a3c3fe0456d7e133af8019575a0dda8bbbb2470ae25d406e3253
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ORCID 0000-0003-2617-8694
0000-0001-9186-870X
0000-0002-0020-4252
OpenAccessLink https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/bioe.12885
PMID 34046918
PQID 2568012580
PQPubID 32153
PageCount 11
ParticipantIDs proquest_miscellaneous_2534613763
proquest_journals_2568012580
pubmed_primary_34046918
crossref_citationtrail_10_1111_bioe_12885
crossref_primary_10_1111_bioe_12885
wiley_primary_10_1111_bioe_12885_BIOE12885
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate September 2021
2021-09-00
20210901
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2021-09-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 09
  year: 2021
  text: September 2021
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationPlace England
PublicationPlace_xml – name: England
– name: Oxford
PublicationTitle Bioethics
PublicationTitleAlternate Bioethics
PublicationYear 2021
Publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Publisher_xml – name: Blackwell Publishing Ltd
References 35441394 - Bioethics. 2022 Apr 20
References_xml – reference: 35441394 - Bioethics. 2022 Apr 20;:
SSID ssj0000955
Score 2.4282484
Snippet This paper is one of the first to analyse the ethical implications of specific healthcare artificial intelligence (AI) applications, and the first to provide a...
SourceID proquest
pubmed
crossref
wiley
SourceType Aggregation Database
Index Database
Enrichment Source
Publisher
StartPage 623
SubjectTerms AI applications in healthcare
Analysis
Application
Artificial Intelligence
Attention
Bioethics
Citizen participation
Clinical decision making
Convergence
Decision support systems
Delivery of Health Care
Deployment
Ethical dilemmas
ethical evaluation
ethical frameworks
Ethics
ethics of new technologies
Evaluation
Health care
Health Facilities
Health services
healthcare ethics
Humans
Intelligence
Medical decision making
New technology
Patient Care
Patients
Scrutiny
Title Evaluation of artificial intelligence clinical applications: Detailed case analyses show value of healthcare ethics approach in identifying patient care issues
URI https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111%2Fbioe.12885
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34046918
https://www.proquest.com/docview/2568012580
https://www.proquest.com/docview/2534613763
Volume 35
WOSCitedRecordID wos000655470900001&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
journalDatabaseRights – providerCode: PRVWIB
  databaseName: Wiley Online Library Full Collection 2020
  customDbUrl:
  eissn: 1467-8519
  dateEnd: 99991231
  omitProxy: false
  ssIdentifier: ssj0000955
  issn: 0269-9702
  databaseCode: DRFUL
  dateStart: 19970101
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com
  providerName: Wiley-Blackwell
link http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1La9wwEB6STVtySZrta5M0TGkvLbjYllXJIZc8dmmhTUNpYG9GlsdkoaxLnLTk1_SvRiM_siGlUOKTwWNJoJnRJ2nmG4A3ZRSTslIFSRmaINGGAk5nDITOySEKK4mMLzahjo_1dJqeLMFelwvT8EP0B25sGd5fs4GbvF4w8nxW0XvnXbVchpXYKa4cwMrRt8np5xtPnPqqp26bkQap4kiejS6S5-bv2wvSHZR5G7T6VWeyfr_xPoa1Fm3ifqMeG7BE8yE8bOpPXg3h0Zf2Zn0IqyddTYOrJ_Bn3HOAY1Uia1dDNIGzBQZP7LIqcfEWfBePfFQqFWjdConGs55QjfVZ9Ru5XeI2z_q4MyQfco8du7nrA2c-fdinYGHL_Ipe1qtJ_RROJ-Pvhx-DtpJDYDn1NyijNNcUOmxESWqEFSUxlCwUuS2yKTVnLSppwqIwOndPnKjQUCwLBzdIxFI8g8G8mtMLQCNTIvoQaaNFkpfCOCeU20iZ0EphYz2Ct910ZralOedqGz-ybrvDE5H5iRjB6172Z0Pu8Vep7U4rstbA68whRV7bpQ5H8Kr_7EyT71vMnKpLlhGJQ0vOg4_geaNNfTci4YOJyA33nVeaf_SfHXz6OvZvm_8jvAWrMcff-Hi4bRhcnF_SS3hgf13M6vMdWFZTvdMazDWZwRrg
linkProvider Wiley-Blackwell
linkToHtml http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV3da9RAEB-09aMvas-v06oj-qIQSbJZs_FN7R0tXs8iLfQtbDYTeiAXaVqlf43_qjObj15RBDFPgUx2F3Zm9re7M78BeFlFMaVOp0FShTZIjKVA0hkDZQpiROE0kfXFJtL53BwdZftdbI7kwrT8EMOBm1iG99di4HIgvWLlxaKmN-xejb4K6wnrESv4-vaX6eHswhVnvuwp7zOyIEsllGezD-W5-PvyivQbzLyMWv2yM739nwO-A7c6vInvWwXZhCu0HMH1tgLl-Qhu7HV36yPY2O-rGpzfhZ-TgQUc6wpFv1qqCVyscHhin1eJq_fg73Dbx6VSiY7XSLSe94QabI7rHyjtkrR5PESeIfmge-z5zbkPXPgEYp-EhR33K3pZryjNPTicTg4-7gRdLYfASfJvUEVZYShkdERJZpVTFQmYLFPiTbKtjOQtptqGZWlNwU-cpKGlWJcMOEjFWt2HtWW9pIeAVmdE9DYy1qikqJRlN1S4KLWh08rFZgyv-vnMXUd0LvU2vub9hkcmIvcTMYYXg-y3lt7jj1JbvVrknYk3OWNFWd21CcfwfPjMxik3LnZJ9ZnIqITxEvvwMTxo1WnoRiVyNBHxcF97rflL__mH3c8T__boX4Sfwc2dg71ZPtudf3oMG7FE4_jouC1YOz05oydwzX0_XTQnTzu7-QXMpB3o
linkToPdf http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV3fT9RAEJ7goYQXgVPxFGGMvmhS03a7dOubcneBiOfFSMJbs91OwyXkSihI-Gv4V9nZ_uCIxoTYpyad7m6yM7Pf7s58A_C-CEKKjYy9qPC1FylNHqczekJlZBGFkUTaFZuIJxN1fJxMm9gczoWp-SG6Aze2DOev2cDpLC8WrDyblfTJulclH8FyxFVkerA8_Dk-OrxzxYkre2r3GYmXxBzKs9GG8tz9fX9F-gNm3ketbtkZr_3ngNfhaYM38UutIBuwRPM-PKkrUF73YeV7c7feh9VpW9Xg-hncjDoWcCwLZP2qqSZwtsDhiW1eJS7eg3_GoYtLpRyNXSNRO94TqrA6Ka-Q2yVu86SLPENyQffY8pvbPnDmEohdEhY23K_oZJ2iVM_haDz6tbfvNbUcPMPJv14RJJki36IjihItjCiIwWQek90k60Jx3mIstZ_nWmX2CaPY1xTK3AIOEqEUL6A3L-f0ElDLhIh2A6WViLJCaOuGMhPE2jdSmFAN4EM7n6lpiM653sZp2m54eCJSNxEDeNfJntX0Hn-V2mrVIm1MvEotVuTVXSp_AG-7z9Y4-cZFz6m8ZBkRWbxkffgANmt16roRER9NBHa4H53W_KP_9OvBj5F7e_UQ4R1YmQ7H6eHB5NtrWA05GMcFx21B7-L8kt7AY_P7YladbzdmcwstUx1j
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation+of+artificial+intelligence+clinical+applications%3A+Detailed+case+analyses+show+value+of+healthcare+ethics+approach+in+identifying+patient+care+issues&rft.jtitle=Bioethics&rft.au=Rogers%2C+Wendy+A&rft.au=Draper%2C+Heather&rft.au=Carter%2C+Stacy+M&rft.date=2021-09-01&rft.pub=Blackwell+Publishing+Ltd&rft.issn=0269-9702&rft.eissn=1467-8519&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=623&rft.epage=633&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111%2Fbioe.12885&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0269-9702&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0269-9702&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0269-9702&client=summon