Cited by 101Digitalization, Law, and RegulationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationEthics and Social Impacts of AI

Medical artificial intelligence: the European legal perspective

Stöger, Karl, Schneeberger, David, Holzinger, Andreas·2021·Communications of the ACM

Abstract

Although the European Commission proposed new legislation for the use of "high-risk artificial intelligence" earlier this year, the existing European fundamental rights framework already provides some clear guidance on the use of medical AI.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3458652

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stöger, K., Schneeberger, D., & Holzinger, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Vienna (AT)
  • University of Alberta (CA)
Venue
Communications of the ACM
Published
2021-10-25
Volume
64
Issue
11
Pages
34-36
ISSN
  • 0001-0782 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7317
OpenAlex
W3211108032
Cited by
101
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 1
FWCI
131.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Communications of the ACM (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Keywords
artificial intelligence in healthcare, EU AI Act, fundamental rights, AI regulation, health data protection

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