Hammer or Measuring Tape? Artificial Intelligence and Justice in Healthcare

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics:1-12 (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a powerful tool for several healthcare tasks. AI tools are suited to optimize predictive models in medicine. Ethical debates about AI’s extension of the predictive power of medical models suggest a need to adapt core principles of medical ethics. This article demonstrates that a popular interpretation of the principle of justice in healthcare needs amendment given the effect of AI on decision-making. The procedural approach to justice, exemplified with Norman Daniels and James Sabin’saccountability for reasonablenessconception, needs amendment because, as research into algorithmic fairness shows, it is insufficiently sensitive to differential effects of seemingly just principles on different groups of people. The same line of research generates methods to quantify differential effects and make them amenable for correction. Thus, what is needed to improve the principle of justice is a combination of procedures for selecting just criteria and principles and the use of algorithmic tools to measure the real impact these criteria and principles have. In this article, the author shows that algorithmic tools do not merely raise issues of justice but can also be used in their mitigation by informing us about the real effects certain distributional principles and criteria would create.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,323

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

On algorithmic fairness in medical practice.Thomas Grote & Geoff Keeling - 2022 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 31 (1):83-94.
Democratizing Algorithmic Fairness.Pak-Hang Wong - 2020 - Philosophy and Technology 33 (2):225-244.
Rawls’s Original Position and Algorithmic Fairness.Ulrik Franke - 2021 - Philosophy and Technology 34 (4):1803-1817.
Proceed with Caution.Annette Zimmermann & Chad Lee-Stronach - 2021 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy (1):6-25.
Disability, fairness, and algorithmic bias in AI recruitment.Nicholas Tilmes - 2022 - Ethics and Information Technology 24 (2).
Artificial intelligence—A personal view.David Marr - 1977 - Artificial Intelligence 9 (September):37-48.
Universal Algorithmic Intelligence: A Mathematical Top-Down Approach.Marcus Hutter - 2007 - In Ben Goertzel & Cassio Pennachin (eds.), Artificial General Intelligence. Springer Verlag. pp. 227-290.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-05-18

Downloads
25 (#637,258)

6 months
16 (#161,486)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jan-Hendrik Heinrichs
Forschungszentrum Jülich

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

What we owe to each other.Thomas Scanlon - 1998 - Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
The weirdest people in the world?Joseph Henrich, Steven J. Heine & Ara Norenzayan - 2010 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (2-3):61-83.
Democratizing Algorithmic Fairness.Pak-Hang Wong - 2020 - Philosophy and Technology 33 (2):225-244.

View all 18 references / Add more references