Are Current Tort Liability Doctrines Adequate for Addressing Injury Caused by AI?

Sullivan, Hannah; Schweikart, Scott J.

doi:10.1001/amajethics.2019.160

Cited by 113 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…All of these "thorny" issues are fundamentally essential to success of any interventions. 36,37 Additionally, while many technology-related questions emerged, IT solutions have been challenging to implement in the current environment because of several sociotechnical factors including poor software usability. 17 Many of these longer term factors important to make changes in clinical practice are not reflected in our research priorities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing Diagnostic Safety Research: Results of a Systematic Research Priority Setting Exercise

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Diagnostic errors are a major source of preventable harm but the science of reducing them remains underdeveloped. Objective To identify and prioritize research questions to advance the field of diagnostic safety in the next 5 years. Participants Ninety-seven researchers and 42 stakeholders were involved in the identification of the research priorities. Design We used systematic prioritization methods based on the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology. We first invited a large international group of expert researchers in various disciplines to submit research questions while considering five prioritization criteria: (1) usefulness, (2) answerability, (3) effectiveness, (4) potential for translation, and (5) maximal potential for effect on diagnostic safety. After consolidation, these questions were prioritized at an in-person expert meeting in April 2019. Top-ranked questions were subsequently reprioritized through scoring on the five prioritization criteria using an online questionnaire. We also invited non-research stakeholders to assign weights to the five criteria and then used these weights to adjust the final prioritization score for each question. Key Results Of the 207 invited researchers, 97 researchers responded and 78 submitted 333 research questions which were then consolidated. Expert meeting participants (n = 21) discussed questions in different breakout sessions and prioritized 50, which were subsequently reduced to the top 20 using the online questionnaire. The top 20 questions addressed mostly system factors (e.g., implementation and evaluation of information technologies), teamwork factors (e.g., role of nurses and other health professionals in the diagnostic process), and strategies to engage patients in the diagnostic process. Conclusions Top research priorities for advancing diagnostic safety in the short-term include strengthening systems and teams and engaging patients to support diagnosis. High-priority areas identified using these systematic methods can inform an actionable research agenda for reducing preventable diagnostic harm.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing Diagnostic Safety Research: Results of a Systematic Research Priority Setting Exercise

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At this stage there is a lively debate on AI liability issues. In particular the so called algorithms of unknown chains of reasoning (black box phenomenon) are seen as problematic [89]. In addition to shared responsibility, emphasis is also placed on the doctor's overall interpretive and evaluative responsibility in situations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translational health technology and system schemes: enhancing the dynamics of health informatics

Rissanen

2020

Health Inf Sci Syst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Translational health technology and design schemes reflect certain themes in systems approach and its dynamics. This paper discusses these aligned ideas in view of their value to translational design processes. The ideas embedded in these two approaches are considered in the light of critical questions associated with the development of health informatics. Health care processes for patients might be very fragmented. Synergy thinking is required in all areas of design: it is crucial to understand the theoretical frames and issues associated with focus environments, administration, and cost policy. By internalizing common nuances in these approaches, designers can ease the interaction and communication between experts from different backgrounds. Synergistic thinking aids designers in health informatics to produce more sophisticated products. Maturing in recognizing the whole aids to take into account “the very essentials” more easily. These skills are very vital in prioritizing development substances in health informatics area.

show abstract

“…SaMD developers will likely continue to market their products as aids to radiologists, who stand to realize efficiency gains and benefit from higher-value workflow changes (26,27). Moreover, the liability hazard associated with autonomous diagnostics ventures into legal terra incognita with attendant ill-defined legal risks, which developers may be reluctant to undertake absent further direction (28).…”

Section: Implications For Radiology: a Bite At The Feeding Hand?mentioning

confidence: 99%

How the FDA Regulates AI

Harvey

Gowda

2020

Academic Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are Current Tort Liability Doctrines Adequate for Addressing Injury Caused by AI?

Cited by 113 publications

References 4 publications

Advancing Diagnostic Safety Research: Results of a Systematic Research Priority Setting Exercise

Advancing Diagnostic Safety Research: Results of a Systematic Research Priority Setting Exercise

Translational health technology and system schemes: enhancing the dynamics of health informatics

How the FDA Regulates AI

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About