Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Exploring how biobanks communicate the possibility of commercial access and its associated benefits and risks in participant documents.A. Lucassen, R. Broekstra, F. Hardcastle & G. Samuel - 2022 - BMC Medical Ethics 23 (1):1-14.
    BackgroundBiobanks and biomedical research data repositories collect their samples and associated data from volunteer participants. Their aims are to facilitate biomedical research and improve health, and they are framed in terms of contributing to the public good. Biobank resources may be accessible to researchers with commercial motivations, for example, researchers in pharmaceutical companies who may utilise the data to develop new clinical therapeutics and pharmaceutical drugs. Studies exploring citizen perceptions of public/private interactions associated with large health data repositories/biobanks indicate that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Trustworthy artificial intelligence and ethical design: public perceptions of trustworthiness of an AI-based decision-support tool in the context of intrapartum care.Angeliki Kerasidou, Antoniya Georgieva & Rachel Dlugatch - 2023 - BMC Medical Ethics 24 (1):1-16.
    BackgroundDespite the recognition that developing artificial intelligence (AI) that is trustworthy is necessary for public acceptability and the successful implementation of AI in healthcare contexts, perspectives from key stakeholders are often absent from discourse on the ethical design, development, and deployment of AI. This study explores the perspectives of birth parents and mothers on the introduction of AI-based cardiotocography (CTG) in the context of intrapartum care, focusing on issues pertaining to trust and trustworthiness.MethodsSeventeen semi-structured interviews were conducted with birth parents (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • “I don’t think people are ready to trust these algorithms at face value”: trust and the use of machine learning algorithms in the diagnosis of rare disease.Angeliki Kerasidou, Christoffer Nellåker, Aurelia Sauerbrei, Shirlene Badger & Nina Hallowell - 2022 - BMC Medical Ethics 23 (1):1-14.
    BackgroundAs the use of AI becomes more pervasive, and computerised systems are used in clinical decision-making, the role of trust in, and the trustworthiness of, AI tools will need to be addressed. Using the case of computational phenotyping to support the diagnosis of rare disease in dysmorphology, this paper explores under what conditions we could place trust in medical AI tools, which employ machine learning.MethodsSemi-structured qualitative interviews with stakeholders who design and/or work with computational phenotyping systems. The method of constant (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Data-driven research and healthcare: public trust, data governance and the NHS. [REVIEW]Charalampia Kerasidou & Angeliki Kerasidou - 2023 - BMC Medical Ethics 24 (1):1-9.
    It is widely acknowledged that trust plays an important role for the acceptability of data sharing practices in research and healthcare, and for the adoption of new health technologies such as AI. Yet there is reported distrust in this domain. Although in the UK, the NHS is one of the most trusted public institutions, public trust does not appear to accompany its data sharing practices for research and innovation, specifically with the private sector, that have been introduced in recent years. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Verification and trust in healthcare.Edwin Jesudason - 2023 - Journal of Medical Ethics 49 (3):223-224.
    ‘Trust but verify’ is a translation of a Russian proverb made famous by former US President Ronald Reagan. In their paper, Grahamet alappear to take an alternate view that might be summarised astrust or verify. The contrast highlights a general question: how do we come to trust in authorities? More specifically, Grahamet alclaim: (1) that UK Trusted Research Environments (TREs) are misnamed as future custodians for big health data because their promised verification systems actually negate the uncertainty that trust requires; (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • TREs are still not about trust.Mackenzie Graham, Richard Milne, Paige Fitzsimmons & Mark Sheehan - 2023 - Journal of Medical Ethics 49 (9):658-660.
    In our recent paper ‘Trust and the Goldacre Review: Why TREs are not about trust’1 we argue that trusted research environments (TREs) reduce the need for trust in the use and sharing of health data, and that referring to these data storage systems as ‘trusted’ raises a number of concerns. Recent replies to our paper have raised several objections to this argument. In this reply, we seek to build on the arguments presented in our original paper, address some of the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark