Healthcare AI Ethics and Patient and Public Engagement: An Science and Technology Studies (STS) Perspective

This article discusses Junhewk Kim’s “Patient and Public Involvement Model in Healthcare artificial intelligence (AI) Ethics.” I focus on two key aspects of Kim’s argument: the particularity of healthcare AI research compared to traditional medical research, and the exclusive legitimacy of patients and citizens as the subjects of external validation. I contend that Kim’s current reasoning does not elucidate the unique nature of big data in healthcare AI and risks limiting the democratic potential of participatory models. The field of Science and Technology Studies (STS), which explores the relationship between science and society, could help to strengthen Kim’s argument by providing a more focused analysis of big data and citizen participation. I conclude that although public involvement is a procedural condition for creating ethical healthcare AI, it is not sufficient on its own to render healthcare AI ethical. The realization of ethical healthcare AI depends on fostering robust interactions among patients, citizens, and experts that go beyond individualistic notions of privacy and ownership and challenge the rigid divide between healthcare professionals and laypeople.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Korean Journal of Medical Ethics
Published
2024-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.35301/ksme.2024.27.4.231
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Healthcare AI Ethics and Patient and Public Engagement: An Science and Technology Studies (STS) Perspective

Miryang Kang
Korean Journal of Medical Ethics
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Healthcare AI Ethics and Patient and Public Engagement: An Science and Technology Studies (STS) Perspective

Miryang Kang
article en

Abstract

This article discusses Junhewk Kim’s “Patient and Public Involvement Model in Healthcare artificial intelligence (AI) Ethics.” I focus on two key aspects of Kim’s argument: the particularity of healthcare AI research compared to traditional medical research, and the exclusive legitimacy of patients and citizens as the subjects of external validation. I contend that Kim’s current reasoning does not elucidate the unique nature of big data in healthcare AI and risks limiting the democratic potential of participatory models. The field of Science and Technology Studies (STS), which explores the relationship between science and society, could help to strengthen Kim’s argument by providing a more focused analysis of big data and citizen participation. I conclude that although public involvement is a procedural condition for creating ethical healthcare AI, it is not sufficient on its own to render healthcare AI ethical. The realization of ethical healthcare AI depends on fostering robust interactions among patients, citizens, and experts that go beyond individualistic notions of privacy and ownership and challenge the rigid divide between healthcare professionals and laypeople.

Korean Journal of Medical EthicsVol. 27(4)
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Healthcare AI Ethics and Patient and Public Engagement: An Science and Technology Studies (STS) Perspective — Miryang Kang · Korean Journal of Medical Ethics (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS