Bio-ethical considerations in the application of artificial intelligence in spinal surgery
Year: 2024
Type: article
Abstract: Bio-ethical considerations in the application of artificial intelligence in spinal surgery Dear Editor,Artificial intelligence is a developing tool in spine surgery, presenting both opportunities and bioethical challenges.This letter elucidates significant challenges regarding transparency, informed consent, data protection, accountability, and prejudice while debunking misconceptions about AI and highlighting its essential advantages without undermining ethical considerations.AI constitutes a collection of tools rather than an autonomous decision-maker.Current AI systems, such as a range of machine learning models, work under set parameters and do not make independent judgments.While their complexity may lead to "black-box" opacity, it does not inherently undermine patient autonomy.Patients must be educated on the role of AI as a supporting system in decision-making, so that true informed consent can occur, with decisions still resting with human clinicians (Quinn et al., 2022).It is vital to distinguish between Natural Intelligence, Artificial Intelligence (AI), and Artificial General Intelligence (AGI).AGI capable of human-like reasoning and decision-making remains speculative and requires solving profound concerns regarding consciousness and cognition.In contrast, contemporary AI systems are specialized tools designed to supplement, not replace, the decision-making processes of natural intelligence (Ray, 2024).This distinction underscores that patient autonomy and informed consent remain intact since AI systems are incapable of coercing patients or surgeons into making decisions.Clear communications about treatment alternatives and related risks are the foundation of informed consent.Awareness of the role of AI in analytical capacities is crucial when bringing AI into spinal surgery; nonetheless, the physician remains the final decision-maker (Solanki et al., 2023).AI-recommended answers should be presented as insights coming out of huge data analyses instead of a sure-shot solution.This alone assures that patients' freedom and their decision-making ability are maintained (Yanisky-Ravid et al., 2022).Handling patient data appropriately is a step toward continued trust.Observing standards such as the WHO's guidelines on digital health preserves sensitive data.Protecting the data to be used, stored, and shared combined with strict respect to the requirements for privacy will serve to lessen the danger.These must be created with privacy-preserving approaches to ensure the security of patient data (Fagherazzi et al., 2020).Accountability still offers a huge difficulty, mainly when things go wrong, and AI plays a role in the bad outcome.The supplier makes decisions, not the AI system.The surgeon should be diligent in making assessments about AI recommendations utilizing his or her knowledge to support the patient's safety.Developers and healthcare facilities have responsibility for training, validation, and maintenance of AI systems.A clear delineation of roles and responsibilities allows ethical and legal clarity.Bias in AI systems is expected to aggravate healthcare inequality.The training of AI on homogeneous datasets may lead to the creation of biased findings.Diverse quality datasets are thus necessary for the development of References
Source: Brain and Spine
Institution: Saveetha University
Language: English
Subfield: Health Informatics
Field: Medicine
Domain: Health Sciences
Open Access status: gold
Estimated APC paid: $1,950
OpenAlex ID: W4405212195