Cited by 92Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationEthics and Social Impacts of AIEthics and bioethics in healthcare

Environmentally sustainable development and use of artificial intelligence in health care

Open access
Richie, Cristina·2022·Bioethics

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) can transform health care by delivering medical services to underserved areas, while also filling gaps in health care provider availability. However, AI may also lead to patient harm due to fatal glitches in robotic surgery, bias in diagnosis, or dangerous recommendations. Despite concerns ethicists have identified in the use of AI in health care, the most significant consideration ought not be vulnerabilities in the software, but the environmental impact of AI. Health care emits a significant amount of carbon in many countries. As AI becomes an essential part of health care, ethical reflection must include the potential to negatively impact the environment. As such, this article will first overview the carbon emissions in health care. It will, second, offer five reasons why carbon calculations are insufficient to address sustainability in health care. Third, the article will derive normative concepts from the goals of medicine, the principles of biomedical ethics, and green bioethics—the very locus in which AI in health care sits—to propose health, justice, and resource conservation as criteria for sustainable AI in health care. In the fourth and final part of the article, examples of sustainable and unsustainable development and use of AI in health care will be evaluated through the three‐fold lens of health, justice, and resource conservation. With various ethical approaches to AI in health care, the imperative for environmental sustainability must be underscored, lest carbon emissions continue to increase, harming people and planet alike.

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 · 10.1111/bioe.13018

Cites

Statistics

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?

  • The current trajectory of AI development in health care focuses on integrating and maximizing existing AI technologies to enhance clinical decision-making and sustainable AI.

    “This strategy aligns with the current trajectory of AI development in health care, where the focus is on integrating and maximizing existing AI technologies to enhance clinical decision-making and focus on sustainable AI [48,49].”

    From Mitigating cognitive biases in clinical decision-making through multi-agent conversations using large language models: simulation study (2024) · cites this paper as [48]

    The Conclusion advocates sustainable use of established AI, and the “Sustainable development of AI in health care” section describes triage algorithms that could guide care and resource allocation. Neither passage establishes that integrating and maximizing existing technologies to enhance clinical decision-making is the current focus of AI development in health care; the Conclusion presents sustainable use as a recommendation, not a description of that trajectory. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 58 · Cited by 92

Authors
Richie, C.
Affiliations
Delft University of Technology (NL)
Corresponding author
Richie, Cristina
Venue
Bioethics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-03-15
Volume
36
Issue
5
Pages
547-555
ISSN
  • 0269-9702 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-8519
OpenAlex
W4220793133
Cited by
92
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 1
FWCI
5.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bioethics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Repository (Delft University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • East Carolina University
  • Brody School of Medicine
  • Technische Universiteit Delft
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
Keywords
artificial intelligence in healthcare, environmental sustainability, CO2 emissions, biomedical ethics, health care ethics, resource conservation, justice, health, sustainable development, environmental impact of AI, medical robotics, algorithmic bias
MeSH terms
Sustainable Development, Artificial Intelligence, Carbon, Delivery of Health Care, Health Facilities, Humans

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