The Effect of Artificial Intelligence on Patient-Physician Trust: Cross-Sectional Vignette Study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) based on routine care data, using artificial intelligence (AI), are increasingly being developed. Previous studies focused largely on the technical aspects of using AI, but the acceptability of these technologies by patients remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate whether patient-physician trust is affected when medical decision-making is supported by a CDSS. METHODS: We conducted a vignette study among the patient panel (N=860) of the University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands. Patients were randomly assigned into 4 groups-either the intervention or control groups of the high-risk or low-risk cases. In both the high-risk and low-risk case groups, a physician made a treatment decision with (intervention groups) or without (control groups) the support of a CDSS. Using a questionnaire with a 7-point Likert scale, with 1 indicating "strongly disagree" and 7 indicating "strongly agree," we collected data on patient-physician trust in 3 dimensions: competence, integrity, and benevolence. We assessed differences in patient-physician trust between the control and intervention groups per case using Mann-Whitney U tests and potential effect modification by the participant's sex, age, education level, general trust in health care, and general trust in technology using multivariate analyses of (co)variance. RESULTS: In total, 398 patients participated. In the high-risk case, median perceived competence and integrity were lower in the intervention group compared to the control group but not statistically significant (5.8 vs 5.6; P=.16 and 6.3 vs 6.0; P=.06, respectively). However, the effect of a CDSS application on the perceived competence of the physician depended on the participant's sex (P=.03). Although no between-group differences were found in men, in women, the perception of the physician's competence and integrity was significantly lower in the intervention compared to the control group (P=.009 and P=.01, respectively). In the low-risk case, no differences in trust between the groups were found. However, increased trust in technology positively influenced the perceived benevolence and integrity in the low-risk case (P=.009 and P=.04, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We found that, in general, patient-physician trust was high. However, our findings indicate a potentially negative effect of AI applications on the patient-physician relationship, especially among women and in high-risk situations. Trust in technology, in general, might increase the likelihood of embracing the use of CDSSs by treating professionals.

Developer perspectives on the ethics of AI-driven neural implants: a qualitative study.

Convergence of neural implants with artificial intelligence (AI) presents opportunities for the development of novel neural implants and improvement of existing neurotechnologies. While such technological innovation carries great promise for the restoration of neurological functions, they also raise ethical challenges. Developers of AI-driven neural implants possess valuable knowledge on the possibilities, limitations and challenges raised by these innovations; yet their perspectives are underrepresented in academic literature. This study aims to explore perspectives of developers of neurotechnology to outline ethical implications of three AI-driven neural implants: a cochlear implant, a visual neural implant, and a motor intention decoding speech-brain-computer-interface. We conducted semi-structured focus groups with developers (n = 19) of AI-driven neural implants. Respondents shared ethically relevant considerations about AI-driven neural implants that we clustered into three themes: (1) design aspects; (2) challenges in clinical trials; (3) impact on users and society. Developers considered accuracy and reliability of AI-driven neural implants conditional for users' safety, authenticity, and mental privacy. These needs were magnified by the convergence with AI. Yet, the need for accuracy and reliability may also conflict with potential benefits of AI in terms of efficiency and complex data interpretation. We discuss strategies to mitigate these challenges.

Nature-versus-nurture considered harmful: Actionability as an alternative tool for understanding the exposome from an ethical perspective.

Exposome research is put forward as a major tool for solving the nature-versus-nurture debate because the exposome is said to represent "the nature of nurture." Against this influential idea, we argue that the adoption of the nature-versus-nurture debate into the exposome research program is a mistake that needs to be undone to allow for a proper bioethical assessment of exposome research. We first argue that this adoption is originally based on an equivocation between the traditional nature-versus-nurture debate and a debate about disease prediction/etiology. Second, due to this mistake, exposome research is pushed to adopt a limited conception of agential control that is harmful to one's thinking about the good that exposome research can do for human health and wellbeing. To fully excise the nature-versus-nurture debate from exposome research, we argue that exposome researchers and bioethicists need to think about the exposome afresh from the perspective of actionability. We define the concept of actionability and related concepts and show how these can be used to analyze the ethical aspects of the exposome. In particular, we focus on refuting the popular "gun analogy" in exposome research, returning results to study participants and risk-taking in the context of a well-lived life.

Embodiment and regenerative implants: a proposal for entanglement.

Regenerative Medicine promises to develop treatments to regrow healthy tissues and cure the physical body. One of the emerging developments within this field is regenerative implants, such as jawbone or heart valve implants, that can be broken down by the body and are gradually replaced with living tissue. Yet challenges for embodiment are to be expected, given that the implants are designed to integrate deeply into the tissue of the living body, so that implant and body become one. In this paper, we explore how regenerative implants may affect the embodied experience of implant recipients. To this end, we take a phenomenological approach. First, we explore what insights the existing phenomenological and empirical literature on embodiment offers regarding the experience of illness and of living with regular (non-regenerative) implants and organ transplants. Second, we apply these insights to better understand how future implant recipients might experience living with regenerative implants. Third, we conclude that concepts and considerations from the existing phenomenological literature do not sufficiently address what it might be like to live with an implantable technology that, over time, becomes one with the living body. We argue that the interwovenness and intimate relationship of people living with regenerative implants should be understood in terms of 'entanglement'. Entanglement allows us to explore the complexities of human-technology relations, acknowledging the inseparability of humans and implantable technologies. Our theoretical foundations regarding the role of embodiment may be tested empirically once more people will be living with regenerative implants.

How Smart are Smart Materials? A Conceptual and Ethical Analysis of Smart Lifelike Materials for the Design of Regenerative Valve Implants.

It may soon become possible not just to replace, but to re-grow healthy tissues after injury or disease, because of innovations in the field of Regenerative Medicine. One particularly promising innovation is a regenerative valve implant to treat people with heart valve disease. These implants are fabricated from so-called 'smart', 'lifelike' materials. Implanted inside a heart, these implants stimulate re-growth of a healthy, living heart valve. While the technological development advances, the ethical implications of this new technology are still unclear and a clear conceptual understanding of the notions 'smart' and 'lifelike' is currently lacking. In this paper, we explore the conceptual and ethical implications of the development of smart lifelike materials for the design of regenerative implants, by analysing heart valve implants as a showcase. In our conceptual analysis, we show that the materials are considered 'smart' because they can communicate with human tissues, and 'lifelike' because they are structurally similar to these tissues. This shows that regenerative valve implants become intimately integrated in the living tissues of the human body. As such, they manifest the ontological entanglement of body and technology. In our ethical analysis, we argue this is ethically significant in at least two ways: It exacerbates the irreversibility of the implantation procedure, and it might affect the embodied experience of the implant recipient. With our conceptual and ethical analysis, we aim to contribute to responsible development of smart lifelike materials and regenerative implants.

The ethical aspects of exposome research: a systematic review.

In recent years, exposome research has been put forward as the next frontier for the study of human health and disease. Exposome research entails the analysis of the totality of environmental exposures and their corresponding biological responses within the human body. Increasingly, this is operationalized by big-data approaches to map the effects of internal as well as external exposures using smart sensors and multiomics technologies. However, the ethical implications of exposome research are still only rarely discussed in the literature. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of the academic literature regarding both the exposome and underlying research fields and approaches, to map the ethical aspects that are relevant to exposome research. We identify five ethical themes that are prominent in ethics discussions: the goals of exposome research, its standards, its tools, how it relates to study participants, and the consequences of its products. Furthermore, we provide a number of general principles for how future ethics research can best make use of our comprehensive overview of the ethical aspects of exposome research. Lastly, we highlight three aspects of exposome research that are most in need of ethical reflection: the actionability of its findings, the epidemiological or clinical norms applicable to exposome research, and the meaning and action-implications of bias.

The boundary problem: Defining and delineating the community in field trials with gene drive organisms.

Despite widespread and worldwide efforts to eradicate vector-borne diseases such as malaria, these diseases continue to have an enormous negative impact on public health. For this reason, scientists are working on novel control strategies, such as gene drive technologies (GDTs). As GDT research advances, researchers are contemplating the potential next step of conducting field trials. An important point of discussion regarding these field trials relates to who should be informed, consulted, and involved in decision-making about their design and launch. It is generally argued that community members have a particularly strong claim to be engaged, and yet, disagreement and lack of clarity exist about how this "community" should be defined and delineated. In this paper, we shed light on this "boundary problem": the problem of determining how boundaries of inclusion and exclusion in (GDT) community engagement should be drawn. As our analysis demonstrates, the process of defining and delineating a community is itself normative. First, we explicate why it is important to define and delineate the community. Second, we demonstrate that different definitions of community are used and intermingled in the debate on GDTs, and argue in favor of distinguishing geographical, affected, cultural, and political communities. Finally, we propose initial guidance for deciding who should (not) be engaged in decision-making about GDT field trials, by arguing that the definition and delineation of the community should depend on the rationale for engagement and that the characteristics of the community itself can guide the effective design of community engagement strategies.

[Eight misconceptions about AI in healthcare]. / Acht misvattingen over AI in de zorg.

It is of paramount importance that healthcare professionals can participate in the academic and societal debate surrounding medical AI. To realise this critical-constructive guidance of AI, it is necessary to be able to distinguish between different types of AI, different applications of AI and to paint the different shades of grey in the current black-and-white debate. This article describes and nuances eight misconceptions that currently dominate the public debate surrounding AI in healthcare. By asking ourselves as healthcare professionals 'what specifically defines our line of work?' we must define what aspects of our occupation we want to have AI either carry out or support, and in what way.

Introducing e-health technology to routine cataract care: patient perspectives on web-based eye test for postoperative telemonitoring.

PURPOSE: To explore cataract patients' experiences with an e-health tool for self-assessing visual function (ie, a web-based eye test), and to formulate recommendations for its successful adoption in routine cataract care. SETTING: Clinics in the Netherlands, Germany, and Austria. DESIGN: Mixed-methods study. METHODS: 22 participants were included in this study; in-depth interviews were conducted with 12. Questionnaires and in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted alongside a multicenter randomized controlled trial evaluating the validity, safety and cost-effectiveness of remote care after cataract surgery (Cataract Online Refraction Evaluation, a Randomized Controlled Trial). Results were analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Participants reported positively about performing the web-based eye test at home. 4 overarching themes were identified in the interviews. First, participants were inventive in overcoming practical barriers encountered while conducting the test. Second, participants desired a clear presentation of test results and their meaning. Third, the ability to self-monitor visual function was appreciated. Fourth, most participants preferred to keep the option to contact their eyecare professional (ECP) postoperatively, especially when experiencing symptoms. Most would be satisfied with a phone consultation or an e-consult. Participants reported positive experiences with the web-based eye test. Barriers for successful adoption were identified, including insecurity about correctly performing the test, incomplete information on how to interpret test results, and a feeling that in-hospital assessments were superior to remote assessments. CONCLUSIONS: It is recommended to focus on building trust in remote eyecare delivery and that access to the ECP be retained when medically indicated or deemed necessary by the patient.

The Ethical Implications of Tissue Engineering for Regenerative Purposes: A Systematic Review.

Tissue Engineering (TE) is a branch of Regenerative Medicine (RM) that combines stem cells and biomaterial scaffolds to create living tissue constructs to restore patients' organs after injury or disease. Over the last decade, emerging technologies such as 3D bioprinting, biofabrication, supramolecular materials, induced pluripotent stem cells, and organoids have entered the field. While this rapidly evolving field is expected to have great therapeutic potential, its development from bench to bedside presents several ethical and societal challenges. To make sure TE will reach its ultimate goal of improving patient welfare, these challenges should be mapped out and evaluated. Therefore, we performed a systematic review of the ethical implications of the development and application of TE for regenerative purposes, as mentioned in the academic literature. A search query in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and PhilPapers yielded 2451 unique articles. After systematic screening, 237 relevant ethical and biomedical articles published between 2008 and 2021 were included in our review. We identified a broad range of ethical implications that could be categorized under 10 themes. Seven themes trace the development from bench to bedside: (1) animal experimentation, (2) handling human tissue, (3) informed consent, (4) therapeutic potential, (5) risk and safety, (6) clinical translation, and (7) societal impact. Three themes represent ethical safeguards relevant to all developmental phases: (8) scientific integrity, (9) regulation, and (10) patient and public involvement. This review reveals that since 2008 a significant body of literature has emerged on how to design clinical trials for TE in a responsible manner. However, several topics remain in need of more attention. These include the acceptability of alternative translational pathways outside clinical trials, soft impacts on society and questions of ownership over engineered tissues. Overall, this overview of the ethical and societal implications of the field will help promote responsible development of new interventions in TE and RM. It can also serve as a valuable resource and educational tool for scientists, engineers, and clinicians in the field by providing an overview of the ethical considerations relevant to their work. Impact statement To our knowledge, this is the first time that the ethical implications of Tissue Engineering (TE) have been reviewed systematically. By gathering existing scholarly work and identifying knowledge gaps, this review facilitates further research into the ethical and societal implications of TE and Regenerative Medicine (RM) and other emerging biomedical technologies. Moreover, it will serve as a valuable resource and educational tool for scientists, engineers, and clinicians in the field by providing an overview of the ethical considerations relevant to their work. As such, our review may promote successful and responsible development of new strategies in TE and RM.

Better governance starts with better words: why responsible human tissue research demands a change of language.

The rise of precision medicine has led to an unprecedented focus on human biological material in biomedical research. In addition, rapid advances in stem cell technology, regenerative medicine and synthetic biology are leading to more complex human tissue structures and new applications with tremendous potential for medicine. While promising, these developments also raise several ethical and practical challenges which have been the subject of extensive academic debate. These debates have led to increasing calls for longitudinal governance arrangements between tissue providers and biobanks that go beyond the initial moment of obtaining consent, such as closer involvement of tissue providers in what happens to their tissue, and more active participatory approaches to the governance of biobanks. However, in spite of these calls, such measures are being adopted slowly in practice, and there remains a strong tendency to focus on the consent procedure as the tool for addressing the ethical challenges of contemporary biobanking. In this paper, we argue that one of the barriers to this transition is the dominant language pervading the field of human tissue research, in which the provision of tissue is phrased as a 'donation' or 'gift', and tissue providers are referred to as 'donors'. Because of the performative qualities of language, the effect of using 'donation' and 'donor' shapes a professional culture in which biobank participants are perceived as passive providers of tissue free from further considerations or entitlements. This hampers the kind of participatory approaches to governance that are deemed necessary to adequately address the ethical challenges currently faced in human tissue research. Rather than reinforcing this idea through language, we need to pave the way for the kind of participatory approaches to governance that are being extensively argued for by starting with the appropriate terminology.

Roles and responsibilities in stem cell research: a focus group study with stem cell researchers and patients.

Background: The perspectives of researchers and patients regarding roles and responsibilities in stem cell research are rarely studied, but these could offer insights about responsible research conduct. Method: We have conducted a qualitative study consisting of focus groups with both early- (n = 7) and late-career stem cell researchers (n = 11) that are primarily based in Europe, and with Dutch patients with chronic lower back pain (n = 9). These focus groups have been analyzed thematically. Results: Four themes were identified: 1) roles and responsibilities in the laboratory, 2) responsibilities of and toward patients and the public, 3) the role of regulation and 4) structural hurdles for responsibility. Discussion: The results suggest that responsible research conduct could be improved by addressing grant application procedures, publication pressure and by providing support of dissemination activities for researchers. Conclusion: Responsibility in stem cell research could be enhanced by embracing open science initiatives and targeted training.

What researchers and patients think about roles and responsibilities in stem cell research is not well known, but this information could help to deal with the ethical aspects of stem cell research. We have conducted focus groups with early and late career stem cell researchers based in Europe and with Dutch patients. Four overarching themes were identified: 1) roles and responsibilities in the laboratory, 2) responsibilities of and toward patients and the public, 3) the role of regulation and 4) structural hurdles for responsibility. The results suggest that responsible research conduct could be improved by addressing grant application procedures, publication pressure and by providing support for communicating the progress and results of research. More generally, open science initiatives and targeted training could help to improve dealing with the ethical aspects of stem cell research.

Governing Gene Drive Technologies: A Qualitative Interview Study.

BACKGROUND: Gene drive technologies (GDTs) bias the inheritance of a genetic element within a population of non-human organisms, promoting its progressive spread across this population. If successful, GDTs may be used to counter intractable problems such as vector-borne diseases. A key issue in the debate on GDTs relates to what governance is appropriate for these technologies. While governance mechanisms for GDTs are to a significant extent proposed and shaped by professional experts, the perspectives of these experts have not been explored in depth. METHODS: A total of 33 GDT experts from different professional disciplines were interviewed to identify, better understand, and juxtapose their perspectives on GDT governance. The pseudonymized transcripts were analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Three main themes were identified: (1) engagement of communities, stakeholders, and publics; (2) power dynamics, and (3) decision-making. There was broad consensus amongst respondents that it is important to engage communities, stakeholders, and publics. Nonetheless, respondents had diverging views on the reasons for doing so and the timing and design of engagement. Respondents also outlined complexities and challenges related to engagement. Moreover, they brought up the power dynamics that are present in GDT research. Respondents stressed the importance of preventing the recurrence of historical injustices and reflected on dilemmas regarding whether and to what extent (foreign) researchers can legitimately make demands regarding local governance. Finally, respondents had diverging views on whether decisions about GDTs should be made in the same way as decisions about other environmental interventions, and on the decision-making model that should be used to decide about GDT deployment. CONCLUSIONS: The insights obtained in this interview study give rise to recommendations for the design and evaluation of GDT governance. Moreover, these insights point to unresolved normative questions that need to be addressed to move from general commitments to concrete obligations.

Developing the building blocks to elucidate the impact of the urban exposome on cardiometabolic-pulmonary disease: The EU EXPANSE project.

By 2030, more than 80% of Europe's population will live in an urban environment. The urban exposome, consisting of factors such as where we live and work, where and what we eat, our social network, and what chemical and physical hazards we are exposed to, provides important targets to improve population health. The EXPANSE (EXposome Powered tools for healthy living in urbAN SEttings) project will study the impact of the urban exposome on the major contributors to Europe's burden of disease: Cardio-Metabolic and Pulmonary Disease. EXPANSE will address one of the most pertinent questions for urban planners, policy makers, and European citizens: "How to maximize one's health in a modern urban environment?" EXPANSE will take the next step in exposome research by (1) bringing together exposome and health data of more than 55 million adult Europeans and OMICS information for more than 2 million Europeans; (2) perform personalized exposome assessment for 5,000 individuals in five urban regions; (3) applying ultra-high-resolution mass-spectrometry to screen for chemicals in 10,000 blood samples; (4) evaluating the evolution of the exposome and health through the life course; and (5) evaluating the impact of changes in the urban exposome on the burden of cardiometabolic and pulmonary disease. EXPANSE will translate its insights and innovations into research and dissemination tools that will be openly accessible via the EXPANSE toolbox. By applying innovative ethics-by-design throughout the project, the social and ethical acceptability of these tools will be safeguarded. EXPANSE is part of the European Human Exposome Network.

Recognizing the ethical implications of stem cell research: A call for broadening the scope.

The ethical implications of stem cell research are often described in terms of risks, side effects, safety, and therapeutic value, which are examples of so-called hard impacts. Hard impacts are typically measurable and quantifiable. To understand the broader spectrum of ethical implications of stem cell research on science and society, it is equally important to recognize soft impacts. Soft impacts are the effects on behavior, experiences, actions, moral values, and social structures; these are often indirect effects of stem cell research. The combined notions of hard and soft impacts offer a broader way of thinking about the social and ethical implications of stem cell research and can help to steer stem cell research into a sociable desirable direction. Soft impacts enable researchers to become more aware of the broad range of significant implications involved in their work and deserve equal attention for understanding such ethical and societal effects of stem cell research.

Mini-gut feelings: perspectives of people with cystic fibrosis on the ethics and governance of organoid biobanking.

Aim: Organoid technology has enormous potential for precision medicine, such as has recently been demonstrated in the field of cystic fibrosis. However, storage and use of organoids has been associated with ethical challenges and there is currently a lack of harmony in regulation and guidelines to govern the rapid emergence of 'organoid medicine'. Developing sound governance demands incorporation of the perspectives of patients as key stakeholders. Materials & methods: We conducted 17 semi-structured interviews with people with cystic fibrosis to explore their perspectives on the ethics and governance of organoid biobanking. Results: We identified three themes: prioritization of research and trust, ambivalent views on commercial involvement and transparency and control. Conclusion: Our study offers important insights for ethically robust governance of 'organoid medicine'.

Lay abstract Organoids are living tissues that can be grown in a lab out of stem cells, which can replicate some features of actual organs in the body. They can be used to study diseases or develop drugs, but also to test the effectiveness of therapy for a specific patient (which is called precision medicine). Organoid technology is promising for the treatment of cystic fibrosis. At the same, storing and using organoids raises ethical and practical challenges. In order to ensure that the interests of those who provide the cells are respected, we interviewed people with cystic fibrosis. Their motivation to participate in organoid research was high, but at the same time they wanted to know how their organoids are used. In addition, while they did not feel the need to be directly involved in decisions about how their tissue is used, they valued ongoing communication from biobanks about its activities.