Advertisement

Ethical considerations in artificial intelligence

  • Nabile M. Safdar
    Affiliations
    Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia

    Department of Biomedical Informatics, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
    Search for articles by this author
  • John D. Banja
    Affiliations
    Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia

    Center for Ethics, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
    Search for articles by this author
  • Carolyn C. Meltzer
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author at: Emory University Hospital, 1364 Clifton Rd, Suite D-112, Atlanta, GA, 30322, Georgia.
    Affiliations
    Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia

    Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia

    Department of Neurology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
    Search for articles by this author
Published:November 23, 2019DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.108768

      Highlights

      • As in the case of most disruptive technologies, assessment of and consensus on the possible ethical pitfalls lag.
      • selection bias in AI datasets can result in inaccurate results in under-represented patient groups.
      • AI models with imaging data acquired from one setting may poorly generalize to other practice settings.
      • Patient image data ownership regulations vary by country and domain.
      • De-identification of image data used in AI algorithms may inadvertently reveal protected health information.

      Abstract

      With artificial intelligence (AI) precipitously perched at the apex of the hype curve, the promise of transforming the disparate fields of healthcare, finance, journalism, and security and law enforcement, among others, is enormous. For healthcare – particularly radiology – AI is anticipated to facilitate improved diagnostics, workflow, and therapeutic planning and monitoring. And, while it is also causing some trepidation among radiologists regarding its uncertain impact on the demand and training of our current and future workforce, most of us welcome the potential to harness AI for transformative improvements in our ability to diagnose disease more accurately and earlier in the populations we serve.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic and PersonalCorporate R&D Professionals
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to European Journal of Radiology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

      1. Harris S, Parekh S. Funding Analysis of Companies Developing Machine Learning Solutions for Medical Imaging. Signify Research. [Internet]. Funding Analysis of Companies Developing Machine Learning Solutions for Medical Imaging. Signify Research. [cited 2019 Jun 2]. Available from: https://s3-eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/signifyresearch/app/uploads/2019/01/31125920/Funding-Analysis-of-Companies-Developing-Machine-Learning-Solutions-for-Medical-Imaging_Jan-2019.

        • Buolamwini J.
        • Gebru T.
        Gender Shades: Intersectional Accuracy Disparities in Commercial Gender Classification.
        2018: 77-91
        • Ng A.
        AI Is the New Electricity: the Disruptive Power of AI Applications in Medical Imaging.
        RSNA Spotlight Course, San Francisco2019 (May 31)
        • Park S.H.
        • Han K.
        Methodologic guide for evaluating clinical performance and effect of artificial intelligence technology for medical diagnosis and prediction.
        Radiology. 2018; 286: 800-809
        • Hall M.A.
        • Schulman K.A.
        Ownership of medical information.
        JAMA. 2009; 301: 1282-1284
        • Cartwright-Smith L.
        • Gray E.
        • Thorpe J.H.
        Health information ownership: legal theories and policy implications.
        Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 2016; 19: 207
        • Tang A.
        • Tam R.
        • Cadrin-Chênevert A.
        • Guest W.
        • Chong J.
        • Barfett J.
        • et al.
        Canadian Association of Radiologists white paper on artificial intelligence in radiology.
        Can. Assoc. Radiol. J. 2018; 69: 120-135
      2. Geis et al. R. Ethics of AI in Radiology: the European and North American Multisociety Statement [Internet]. American College of Radiology. [cited 2019 Jun 23]. Available from: https://www.acrdsi.org/-/media/DSI/Files/PDFs/Ethics-of-AI-in-Radiology-Statement_RFC.

      3. GDPR Recitals and Articles [Internet].
        European Union, 2019 ([cited 2019 Jun 17]. Available from:)
        • Winslade W.J.
        • Ross J.W.
        Privacy, confidentiality, and autonomy in psychotherapy.
        Neb L Rev. 1985; 64: 578
        • Beauchamp T.
        • Childress J.
        Principles of Biomedical Ethics.
        Seventh, 2013
        • Brundage M.
        • Avin S.
        • Clark J.
        • Toner H.
        • Eckersley P.
        • Garfinkel B.
        • et al.
        The malicious use of artificial intelligence: Forecasting, prevention, and mitigation.
        arXiv preprint. 2018; (arXiv:180207228)
        • Ford R.A.
        • Price W.
        • Nicholson I.
        Privacy and accountability in black-box medicine.
        Mich Telecomm & Tech. L Rev. 2016; 23: 1
      4. Meyer D. AI Has a Big Privacy Problem And Europe’s GDPR Is About to Expose It | Fortune [Internet]. Fortune. [cited 2019 Jun 17]. Available from: https://fortune.com/2018/05/25/ai-machine-learning-privacy-gdpr/.

      5. Roberts J. The GDPR Is in Effect: Should U.S. Companies Be Afraid? [Internet]. Yahoo FInance. [cited 2019 Jun 30]. Available from: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/gdpr-effect-u-companies-afraid-033029332.html.

        • Neamatullah I.
        • Douglass M.M.
        • Lehman L.H.
        • Reisner A.
        • Villarroel M.
        • Long W.J.
        • et al.
        Automated de-identification of free-text medical records.
        BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 2008; 8: 32
        • Milchenko M.
        • Marcus D.
        Obscuring surface anatomy in volumetric imaging data.
        Neuroinform. 2013; 11: 65-75
      6. Newman L. AI Can Recognize Your Face Even If You’re Pixelated | WIRED [Internet]. Wired. [cited 2019 Jun 30]. Available from: https://www.wired.com/2016/09/machine-learning-can-identify-pixelated-faces-researchers-show/.

        • Rothstein M.A.
        Is deidentification sufficient to protect health privacy in research?.
        Am. J. Bioeth. 2010; 10: 3-11
        • Na L.
        • Yang C.
        • Lo C.-C.
        • Zhao F.
        • Fukuoka Y.
        • Aswani A.
        Feasibility of reidentifying individuals in large national physical activity data sets from which protected health information has been removed with use of machine learning.
        JAMA Network Open. 2018; 1 (e186040–e186040)
        • Langlotz C.P.
        • Allen B.
        • Erickson B.J.
        • Kalpathy-Cramer J.
        • Bigelow K.
        • Cook T.S.
        • et al.
        A roadmap for foundational research on artificial intelligence in medical imaging: from the 2018 NIH/RSNA/ACR/the Academy Workshop.
        Radiology. 2019; 291: 781-791