Preventing potential drug-drug interactions through alerting decision support systems: A clinical context based methodology

2019 ◽  
Vol 127 ◽  
pp. 18-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Habibollah Pirnejad ◽  
Parasto Amiri ◽  
Zahra Niazkhani ◽  
Afshin Shiva ◽  
Khadijeh Makhdoomi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Drug Interactions ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Potential Drug ◽  
Clinical Context

scholarly journals Responsibility, second opinions and peer-disagreement: ethical and epistemological challenges of using AI in clinical diagnostic contexts

2021 ◽  
pp. medethics-2021-107440
Author(s):  
Hendrik Kempt ◽  
Saskia K Nagel
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Ethical Issue ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Second Opinion ◽  
Clinical Context ◽  
Peer Disagreement ◽  
Responsibility Attribution ◽  
Artificial Intelligent ◽  
Different Types

In this paper, we first classify different types of second opinions and evaluate the ethical and epistemological implications of providing those in a clinical context. Second, we discuss the issue of how artificial intelligent (AI) could replace the human cognitive labour of providing such second opinion and find that several AI reach the levels of accuracy and efficiency needed to clarify their use an urgent ethical issue. Third, we outline the normative conditions of how AI may be used as second opinion in clinical processes, weighing the benefits of its efficiency against concerns of responsibility attribution. Fourth, we provide a ‘rule of disagreement’ that fulfils these conditions while retaining some of the benefits of expanding the use of AI-based decision support systems (AI-DSS) in clinical contexts. This is because the rule of disagreement proposes to use AI as much as possible, but retain the ability to use human second opinions to resolve disagreements between AI and physician-in-charge. Fifth, we discuss some counterarguments.

Assigning Value to Clinical Information – A Major Limiting Factor in the Implementation of Decision-Support Systems

1996 ◽  
Vol 35 (01) ◽  
pp. 1-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. T. de Dombal
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Information ◽  
Limiting Factor ◽  
Major Difficulty ◽  
Computer Aided ◽  
Computer Aided Decision

AbstractThis paper deals with a major difficulty and potential limiting factor in present-day decision support - that of assigning precise value to an item (or group of items) of clinical information. Historical determinist descriptive thinking has been challenged by current concepts of uncertainty and probability, but neither view is adequate. Four equations are proposed outlining factors which affect the value of clinical information, which explain some previously puzzling observations concerning decision support. It is suggested that without accommodation of these concepts, computer-aided decision support cannot progress further, but if they can be accommodated in future programs, the implications may be profound.

Architectures for Architects

1993 ◽  
Vol 32 (01) ◽  
pp. 12-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. A. Musen
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Design And Development

Abstract:Response to Heathfield HA, Wyatt J. Philosophies for the design and development of clinical decision-support systems. Meth Inform Med 1993; 32: 1-8.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document