Cited by 25Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationEthics and Social Impacts of AIExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)

Ethical framework for responsible foundational models in medical imaging

Open access
Jha, Debesh, Durak, Gorkem, Das, Abhijit, Sanjotra, Jasmer, Susladkar, Onkar, Sarkar, Suramyaa, Rauniyar, Ashish, Kumar Tomar, Nikhil +28 more·2025·Frontiers in Medicine

Abstract

The emergence of foundational models represents a paradigm shift in medical imaging, offering extraordinary capabilities in disease detection, diagnosis, and treatment planning. These large-scale artificial intelligence systems, trained on extensive multimodal and multi-center datasets, demonstrate remarkable versatility across diverse medical applications. However, their integration into clinical practice presents complex ethical challenges that extend beyond technical performance metrics. This study examines the critical ethical considerations at the intersection of healthcare and artificial intelligence. Patient data privacy remains a fundamental concern, particularly given these models' requirement for extensive training data and their potential to inadvertently memorize sensitive information. Algorithmic bias poses a significant challenge in healthcare, as historical disparities in medical data collection may perpetuate or exacerbate existing healthcare inequities across demographic groups. The complexity of foundational models presents significant challenges regarding transparency and explainability in medical decision-making. We propose a comprehensive ethical framework that addresses these challenges while promoting responsible innovation. This framework emphasizes robust privacy safeguards, systematic bias detection and mitigation strategies, and mechanisms for maintaining meaningful human oversight. By establishing clear guidelines for development and deployment, we aim to harness the transformative potential of foundational models while preserving the fundamental principles of medical ethics and patient-centered care.

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 · 10.3389/fmed.2025.1544501

Cites

61 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jha, D., Durak, G., Das, A., Sanjotra, J., Susladkar, O., Sarkar, S., Rauniyar, A., Kumar Tomar, N., Peng, L., Li, S., Biswas, K., Aktas, E., Keles, E., Antalek, M., Zhang, Z., Wang, B., Zhu, X., Pan, H., Seyithanoglu, D., Medetalibeyoglu, A., Sharma, V., Cicek, V., Rahsepar, A. A., Hendrix, R., Cetin, A. E., Aydogan, B., Abazeed, M., Miller, F. H., Keswani, R. N., Savas, H., Jambawalikar, S., Ladner, D. P., Borhani, A. A., Spampinato, C., Wallace, M. B., & Bagci, U.
Affiliations
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • SINTEF Digital (NO)
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
Venue
Frontiers in Medicine
Published
2025-05-19
Volume
12
Pages
1544501-1544501
ISSN
2296-858X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4410495919
Cited by
21
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 8
FWCI
1.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (R01-CA240639, R01-CA246704, R01-HL171376, U01-CA268808)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Keywords
foundation models, large language models, diagnostic imaging, AI ethics, patient data privacy, algorithmic bias, health care inequities, explainability, transparency, human oversight, responsible AI deployment, medical ethics

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