Fair by chance? On the use of algorithms in therapeutic decisions

Predictive tools made possible by advances in machine learning techniques may help clinicians make more accurate decisions about who should be allocated costly therapies, such as immunotherapy, which only work on a relatively low proportion of patients. In this article, I argue that a fair decision procedure must recognise each patients' chance of responding well. To do so, the procedure should not apply a fixed threshold to probability scores. Rather, each patient should be given a chance of being allocated the therapy matching her probability score. An important consequence of this conclusion is that the fair use of algorithmic scores may not guarantee that the therapy is allocated to those who will respond well to the highest possible degree.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Medical Ethics
Published
2025-05-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2025-110819
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Healthcare cost, quality, practices
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.82
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Fair by chance? On the use of algorithms in therapeutic decisions

Sune Holm
1 citations
Journal of Medical Ethics
Healthcare cost, quality, practices
2.82
article

Fair by chance? On the use of algorithms in therapeutic decisions

Sune Holm
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Predictive tools made possible by advances in machine learning techniques may help clinicians make more accurate decisions about who should be allocated costly therapies, such as immunotherapy, which only work on a relatively low proportion of patients. In this article, I argue that a fair decision procedure must recognise each patients' chance of responding well. To do so, the procedure should not apply a fixed threshold to probability scores. Rather, each patient should be given a chance of being allocated the therapy matching her probability score. An important consequence of this conclusion is that the fair use of algorithmic scores may not guarantee that the therapy is allocated to those who will respond well to the highest possible degree.

Journal of Medical Ethics
Copenhagen Business School (DK)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Healthcare cost, quality, practices
2.82
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.