Artificial intelligence and medical futility

BACKGROUND: Determining when medical treatment is futile is conceptually, empirically, and ethically disputed. This creates challenges for patients, families, doctors, healthcare, and legal systems. Amid such disputes, there is still a practical need to resolve futility questions in individual cases. Can artificial intelligence (AI) be ethically and effectively used to help with such decisions? METHODS: We adopted a critical narrative review method. We first surveyed existing scholarship on the ethics of medical futility to identify the main positions in ongoing futility debates. We then surveyed existing or potential medical AI devices to identify whether such tools might be used to help address these debates or their practical upshots. Finally, we philosophically analysed whether such tools ought to be used, identifying and weighing reasons using analytic argument, applying relevant ethical concepts, and philosophical principles, such as respect for autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. RESULTS: We found that there are some key challenges or risks in using AI for such purposes, for example, using AI may exacerbate the problem of self-fulfilling prophecies in futility determination by absorbing predicted outcomes as data. Nevertheless, under certain conditions, medical AI could ethically be used to prevent or help resolve futility disputes in healthcare decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: AI could ethically contribute to preventing or resolving futility disputes depending on how AI is integrated and regulated in end-of-life care.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
Published
2026-06-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-026-03635-6
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Artificial intelligence and medical futility

Dominic Wilkinson, Sinead Prince, Finn Lip, Julian Savulescu et al.
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

Artificial intelligence and medical futility

Dominic Wilkinson, Sinead Prince, Finn Lip, Julian Savulescu, G. Owen Schaefer, Brian D. Earp
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Determining when medical treatment is futile is conceptually, empirically, and ethically disputed. This creates challenges for patients, families, doctors, healthcare, and legal systems. Amid such disputes, there is still a practical need to resolve futility questions in individual cases. Can artificial intelligence (AI) be ethically and effectively used to help with such decisions? METHODS: We adopted a critical narrative review method. We first surveyed existing scholarship on the ethics of medical futility to identify the main positions in ongoing futility debates. We then surveyed existing or potential medical AI devices to identify whether such tools might be used to help address these debates or their practical upshots. Finally, we philosophically analysed whether such tools ought to be used, identifying and weighing reasons using analytic argument, applying relevant ethical concepts, and philosophical principles, such as respect for autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. RESULTS: We found that there are some key challenges or risks in using AI for such purposes, for example, using AI may exacerbate the problem of self-fulfilling prophecies in futility determination by absorbing predicted outcomes as data. Nevertheless, under certain conditions, medical AI could ethically be used to prevent or help resolve futility disputes in healthcare decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: AI could ethically contribute to preventing or resolving futility disputes depending on how AI is integrated and regulated in end-of-life care.

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
National University of Singapore (SG), The University of Western Australia (AU), University of Oxford (GB), Murdoch Children's Research Institute (AU)
Wellcome Trust, National University of Singapore, National Research Foundation Singapore
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
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.