Using artificial intelligence in healthcare: Allocating liability and risks
Abstract
Within the framework of this article, the author considers the features regarding the application and use of artificial intelligence (AI) in medical practice. This includes complex issues related to the personal liability of a doctor when making decisions on diagnostics and treatment based on an algorithm proposal (a system for supporting medical decisions), as well as possible options for the responsibility of the algorithm (AI) developer. The analysis provides an overview of the existing system for holding medical professionals accountable, as well as an assessment of possible options for the distribution of responsibility in connection with the widespread introduction of AI into the work of doctors alongside the possible introduction of AI into standard medical care. The author considers the possibility of establishing more serious requirements for the collection of information on the side effects of such devices for an AI registered as a medical device. Using the method of legal analysis and the comparative legal method, the author analyzes the current global trends in the distribution of responsibility for harm in such cases where there is an error and/or inaccuracy in making a medical decision; as a result of this, the author demonstrates possible options for the distribution of the roles of the healthcare professional and AI in the near future.
About the Author
E. P. Tretyakova
BGP Litigation Law Firm
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ekaterina P. Tretyakova — LLM, Associate, Life Sciences & Technology
bld. 2, 6, Presnenskaya emb., Moscow, 123112, Russia
References
1. Chesterman, S. (2020). Artificial intelligence and the limits of legal personality. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 69(4), 819–844. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589320000366
2. Forcier, M. B., Gallois, H., Siobhan, M., & Yann, J. (2019). Integrating artificial intelligence into health care through data access: Can the GDPR act as a beacon for policymakers? Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 6(1). 317–335. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsz013
3. Hacker, P., Krestel, R., Grundmann, S., & Naumann, F. (2020). Explainable AI under contract and tort law: Legal incentives and technical challenges. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 28, 415–439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-020-09260-6
4. Hallevy, G. (2015). Liability for crimes involving artificial intelligence systems. Springer International Publishing.
5. Kratenko, M. V. (2021). Tort law vs compensation (insurance) schemes. Part one: Medical injuries [Deliktnoye pravo vs kompensatsionnyye (strakhovyye) skhemy. Chast’ pervaya: Meditsinskiye travmy]. Civilistika, 2(4), 18–93.
6. McGlynn, E. A., Asch, S. M., Adams, J., Keesey, J., Hicks, J., De Cristofaro, A., & Kerr, E. A. (2003). The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. New England Journal of Medicine, 348(26): 2635–2645. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa022615
7. Soktoev, Z. B., & Spiridonov, V. A. (2021). Ispol’zovaniye priyemov formal’noy formal’noy logiki pri vyyavlenii prichinnoy svyazi po «vrachebnomu delu» [Logical methods for determination of causality in “medical cases”]. Sudebno-Meditsinskaya Ekspertisa, 64(6), 56–60. https://doi.org/10.17116/sudmed20216406156
8. Stepanov, S. K. (2021). Dekonstruktsiya pravosub”yektnosti ili mesto iskusstvennogo intellekta v prave [Deconstruction of the legal personhood of artificial intelligence]. Digital Law Journal, 2(2), 14–30. https://doi.org.ru/10.38044/2686-9136-2021-2-2-14-30
9. Ziemianin, K. (2021). Civil legal personality of artificial intelligence. Future or utopia? Internet Policy Review, 10(2). https://do.org/10.14763/2021.2.1544
Review
Views: 123
Email this article 