AI Health Ethical Review: A Value Design Methodology

As our world becomes more dependent on data, algorithms are increasingly being used to make informed decisions in areas ranging from finance to HR. The healthcare sector is no exception, and artificial intelligence systems are becoming more and more widespread in this area. While AI can help us make more informed and efficient decisions, it also presents many moral and ethical challenges. One of the biggest issues is the issue of trust. When "machine" replaces "human" decision making, it can be difficult for patients and healthcare professionals to trust the outcome. In addition, the "black box" mechanisms in artificial intelligence systems make it unclear who is responsible for the decisions made, which can lead to ethical dilemmas. In addition, there is a risk of emotional frustration for patients and healthcare professionals, as AI may not be able to provide the kind of human touch that is often needed in healthcare. Despite increased attention to these issues in recent years, technical solutions to these complex moral and ethical issues are often developed without regard to the social context and opinions of the advocates affected by the technology. In addition, calls for more ethical and socially responsible AI often focus on basic legal principles such as "transparency" and "responsibility" and leave out the much more problematic area of human values. To solve this problem, the article proposes a "value-sensitive" approach to the development of AI, which can help translate basic human rights and values into context-sensitive requirements for AI algorithms. This approach can help create a route from human values to clear and understandable requirements for AI design. It can also help overcome ethical issues that hinder the responsible implementation of AI in healthcare and everyday life.

Keywords

bioethics, artificial intelligence, value design, 6 principles of AI, black box problem, value scenarios, value-sensitive approach, collaborative design, roadmap, ethical AI.

Received

28.06.2023

Publication date

28.06.2023

Number of characters

30805

Cite

GOST	AI Health Ethical Review: A Value Design Methodology // Chelovek – 2023. – V. 34. – Issue 3 C. 129-145 [Electronic resource]. URL: https://chelovek-journal.ru/S023620070026109-6-1 (circulation date: 17.05.2024). DOI: 10.31857/S023620070026109-6
MLA	, "AI Health Ethical Review: A Value Design Methodology." Chelovek 34.3 (2023):129-145. DOI: 10.31857/S023620070026109-6
APA	(2023). AI Health Ethical Review: A Value Design Methodology. Chelovek 34(3), pp.129-145 DOI: 10.31857/S023620070026109-6

100 rub.

When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 159

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Aizenberg E., Van den Hoven J. Designing for human rights in AI. Big Data & Society. 2020. Vol. 7, Iss. 2. P.1–30. DOI: 10.1177/2053951720949566

2. Azenkot S., Prasain S., Borning A., et al. Enhancing independence and safety for blind and deaf-blind public transit riders. Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems CHI ’11. New York, NY, 2011. P. 3247–3256.

3. Davis J., Nathan L.P. Value Sensitive Design: Applications, Adaptations, and Critiques. Handbook of Ethics, Values, and Technological Design. Van den Hoven J., Vermaas P.E., Van de Poel I. (eds.). Dordrecht: Springer, 2015. P. 11–40.

4. Friedman B. Human Values and the Design of Computer Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1997.

5. MacIntyre A. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. Notre Dame, IN: Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 1981.

6. Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Official Journal of the European Union. 2012. Vol. 55. P. 391–407.

7. Santoni de Sio F., Van Wynsberghe A. When Should We Use Care Robots? The Nature- of-Activities Approach. Science and Engineering Ethics. 2016. Vol. 22, N 6. P. 1745–1760. DOI: 10.1007/s11948-015-9715-4

8. Van de Poel I. Translating Values into Design Requirements. Philosophy and Engineering: Reflections on Practice, 28 Principles and Process. Michelfelder D.P., McCarthy N., Goldberg D.E. (eds.). Dordrecht: Springer, 2013. P. 253–266.

9. Van der Velden M., Mörtberg C. Participatory Design and Design for Values. Handbook of Ethics, Values, and Technological Design, Van den Hoven J., Vermaas P.E., Van de Poel I. (eds.). Dordrecht: Springer, 2015. P. 41–66.