Cited by 33Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationMedical Malpractice and Liability IssuesArtificial Intelligence in Law

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Should Watson Be Consulted for a Second Opinion?

Open access
David D. Luxton·2019·AMA Journal of Ethics

Abstract

This article discusses ethical responsibility and legal liability issues regarding use of IBM Watson TM for clinical decision making.In a case, a patient presents with symptoms of leukemia.Benefits and limitations of using Watson or other intelligent clinical decision-making tools are considered, along with precautions that should be taken before consulting artificially intelligent systems.Guidance for health care professionals and organizations using artificially intelligent tools to diagnose and to develop treatment recommendations are also offered. CaseMs L is a 63-year-old woman who visits her primary care physician, Dr R, with newonset fatigue and gum bleeding.After a thorough history and physical examination, Dr R orders a complete blood count, the results of which show anemia, thrombocytopenia, and leukocytosis.Dr R urgently refers Ms L to Dr O in hematology-oncology.Following more testing, Dr O concludes that Ms L has acute myeloid leukemia, admits her to the hospital, and schedules her for induction chemotherapy.After several weeks of therapy, Ms L seems to be benefitting little from treatment and her condition has worsened since admission.Stumped by what once seemed like a routine case, Dr O recommends to Ms L genetic testing of her cancerous cells, which could offer additional information that could potentially lead to a different diagnosis or treatment plan.Dr O also considers consulting colleagues at the University of Tokyo, who recently used the IBM Watson TM artificial intelligence (AI) system to correctly diagnose a rare form of leukemia in a very similar case. 1 Dr O recalls Watson being able to sift through millions of pages of clinical literature as well as being able to incorporate a patient's genetic background and clinical history to come up with a diagnosis and treatment plan, all in a fraction of the time that it would take a physician to do.Dr O wonders: Perhaps Watson would come to the same conclusion I did.Or maybe Watson would find something I missed and help save Ms L's life.Or maybe Watson would be totally unhelpful and waste my and Ms L's time.Dr O also wonders whether to explain Watson to Ms L and invite her to consider these questions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/amajethics.2019.131

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 8 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. IBM Watson hard at work: new breakthroughs transform quality care for patients [press release]. New York, NY: Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; February 8, 2013.
  2. IBM and Partners to Transform Personal Health with Watson and Open Cloud [press release]. Armonk, NY: IBM; April 13, 2015. https://www- 03.ibm.com/press/uk/en/pressrelease/46609.wss. Accessed on August 15, 2018.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Luxton, D. D.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
David D. Luxton
Venue
AMA Journal of Ethics
Published
2019-02-01
Volume
21
Issue
2
Pages
E131-137
ISSN
  • 1937-7010 (ISSN-L)
  • 2376-6980
OpenAlex
W2916650597
Cited by
33
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3
FWCI
1.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The AMA Journal of Ethic (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Social Sciences › Law › Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues
  • Social Sciences › Law › Artificial Intelligence in Law
Keywords
IBM Watson, artificial intelligence in clinical decision-making, second opinion, acute myeloid leukemia, ethical responsibility, legal liability, informed consent, genetic testing, treatment guidelines, physician-patient communication
MeSH terms
Clinical Decision-Making, Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Referral and Consultation, Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review