Cited by 101Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationEthics and Social Impacts of AIEthics in Clinical Research

Ethical concerns around use of artificial intelligence in health care research from the perspective of patients with meningioma, caregivers and health care providers: a qualitative study

Open access
McCradden, Melissa D., Baba, Ami, Saha, Ashirbani, Ahmad, Sidra, Boparai, Kanwar, Fadaiefard, Pantea, Cusimano, Michael D.·2020·CMAJ Open

Abstract

BACKGROUND: As artificial intelligence (AI) approaches in research increase and AI becomes more integrated into medicine, there is a need to understand perspectives from members of the Canadian public and medical community. The aim of this project was to investigate current perspectives on ethical issues surrounding AI in health care. METHODS: In this qualitative study, adult patients with meningioma and their caregivers were recruited consecutively (August 2018-February 2019) from a neurosurgical clinic in Toronto. Health care providers caring for these patients were recruited through snowball sampling. Based on a nonsystematic literature search, we constructed 3 vignettes that sought participants' views on hypothetical issues surrounding potential AI applications in health care. The vignettes were presented to participants in interviews, which lasted 15-45 minutes. Responses were transcribed and coded for concepts, frequency of response types and larger concepts emerging from the interview. RESULTS: We interviewed 30 participants: 18 patients, 7 caregivers and 5 health care providers. For each question, a variable number of responses were recorded. The majority of participants endorsed nonconsented use of health data but advocated for disclosure and transparency. Few patients and caregivers felt that allocation of health resources should be done via computerized output, and a majority stated that it was inappropriate to delegate such decisions to a computer. Almost all participants felt that selling health data should be prohibited, and a minority stated that less privacy is acceptable for the goal of improving health. Certain caveats were identified, including the desire for deidentification of data and use within trusted institutions. INTERPRETATION: In this preliminary study, patients and caregivers reported a mixture of hopefulness and concern around the use of AI in health care research, whereas providers were generally more skeptical. These findings provide a point of departure for institutions adopting health AI solutions to consider the ethical implications of this work by understanding stakeholders' perspectives.

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 · 10.9778/cmajo.20190151

Cites

27 of 27 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?

  • AI presents a range of potential future concerns for qualitative research due to its rapid technological advancement, novelty, and social context.

    “AI presents a range of potential future concerns for qualitative research due to its rapid technological advancement, novelty, and social context (Floridi, 2019; McCradden et al., 2020).”

    From Quality Criteria: General and Specific Guidelines for Qualitative Approaches in Psychology Research. A Concise Guide for Novice Researchers and Reviewers (2024) · cites this paper as McCradden et al., 2020

    The Abstract says AI is evolving rapidly and describes ethical concerns about its use in health care research, including accountability, responsibility and trust. But the paper uses qualitative interviews to study those concerns; it does not identify AI as posing future concerns for qualitative research itself or attribute such concerns to novelty and social context. The indexed passages provide no page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Qualitative research involving AI and human participants prompts questions about data protection, privacy, reliance on AI-generated predictions, the validity of computer outputs, commercialization of data, sharing data with private institutions, and confidentiality.

    “Qualitative research involving AI and human participants prompts questions about data protection, privacy, reliance on AI-generated predictions, the validity of computer outputs, commercialization of data, sharing data with private institutions, and con fi dentiality (McCradden et al., 2020).”
  • There remains no consensus on the threshold of health data that requires individual consent for use, but in some cases, deidentification may be deemed satisfactory for bypassing this step.

    “There remains no consensus of the threshold of health data that requires individual consent for use, but in some cases, deidentification (including of name, date of birth, address, and/or health card number) may be deemed satisfactory for bypassing this step [153].”
  • Most patients are opposed to AI being used for allocating treatment and believe those decisions require their collaborative input.

    “AI should not be used for the purposes of allocating treatment, as most patients are opposed and believe those decisions require their collaborative input [153].”

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
McCradden, M. D., Baba, A., Saha, A., Ahmad, S., Boparai, K., Fadaiefard, P., & Cusimano, M. D.
Affiliations
St. Michael's Hospital (CA)
Venue
CMAJ Open
Published
2020-01
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
E90-E95
ISSN
2291-0026 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3007819350
Cited by
101
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 3
FWCI
3.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • CMAJ Open (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 in Clinical Research
Keywords
artificial intelligence in healthcare, AI ethics, health data privacy, healthcare resource allocation, algorithmic decision-making, transparency, caregivers, healthcare workers, public attitudes toward AI
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Artificial Intelligence, Canada, Ethics, Medical, Female, Health Personnel, Health Services Research, Humans, Male, Meningioma, Middle Aged, Caregivers, Qualitative Research, Young Adult

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