Search

The field of dermatology is experiencing the rapid deployment of artificial intelligence (AI), from mobile applications (apps) for skin cancer detection to large language models like ChatGPT that can answer generalist or specialist questions about skin diagnoses. With these new applications, ethical concerns have emerged. In this scoping review, we aimed to identify the applications of AI to the field of dermatology and to understand their ethical implications. We used a multifaceted search approach, searching PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar for primary literature, following the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews guidance. Our advanced query included terms related to dermatology, AI and ethical considerations. Our search yielded 202 papers. After initial screening, 68 studies were included. Thirty-two were related to clinical image analysis and raised ethical concerns for misdiagnosis, data security, privacy violations and replacement of dermatologist jobs. Seventeen discussed limited skin of colour representation in datasets leading to potential misdiagnosis in the general population. Nine articles about teledermatology raised ethical concerns, including the exacerbation of health disparities, lack of standardized regulations, informed consent for AI use and privacy challenges. Seven addressed inaccuracies in the responses of large language models. Seven examined attitudes toward and trust in AI, with most patients requesting supplemental assessment by a physician to ensure reliability and accountability. Benefits of AI integration into clinical practice include increased patient access, improved clinical decision-making, efficiency and many others. However, safeguards must be put in place to ensure the ethical application of AI., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: In the ambulatory setting, missed cancer diagnoses are leading contributors to patient harm and malpractice risk; however, there are limited data on the malpractice case characteristics for these cases., Objective: The aim of this study was to examine key features and factors identified in missed cancer diagnosis malpractice claims filed related to primary care and evaluate predictors of clinical and claim outcomes., Methods: We analyzed 2155 diagnostic error closed malpractice claims in outpatient general medicine. We created multivariate models to determine factors that predicted case outcomes., Results: Missed cancer diagnoses represented 980 (46%) cases of primary care diagnostic errors, most commonly from lung, colorectal, prostate, or breast cancer. The majority (76%) involved errors in clinical judgment, such as a failure or delay in ordering a diagnostic test (51%) or failure or delay in obtaining a consult or referral (37%). These factors were independently associated with higher-severity patient harm. The majority of these errors were of high severity (85%)., Conclusions: Malpractice claims involving missed diagnoses of cancer in primary care most often involve routine screening examinations or delays in testing or referral. Our findings suggest that more reliable closed-loop systems for diagnostic testing and referrals are crucial for preventing diagnostic errors in the ambulatory setting., (© 2019 American Society for Healthcare Risk Management of the American Hospital Association.)

On January 5, 2019, the Associated Press reported that a woman thought to have been in the vegetative state for over a decade gave birth at a Hacienda HealthCare facility. Until she delivered, the staff at the Phoenix center had not noticed that their patient was pregnant. The patient was also misdiagnosed. Misdiagnosis of patients with disorders of consciousness in institutional settings is more the norm than the exception. Misdiagnosis is also connected to a broad and extremely significant change in the understanding of the vegetative state-a change that the field of bioethics has not yet fully taken into account. In September 2018, the American Academy of Neurology, the American College of Rehabilitation Medicine, and the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research issued a comprehensive evidence-based review on disorders of consciousness and an associated practice guideline on the care of these patients. These landmark publications update the 1994 Multi-Society Task Force Report on the Vegetative State, which subcategorized the persistent vegetative state as either persistent (once the vegetative state lasted one month) or permanent (once the vegetative state lasted three months after anoxic injury or twelve months after traumatic injury). Noting that 20 percent of patients thought to be permanently unconscious might regain some level of consciousness, the new guideline has eliminated the permanent vegetative state as a diagnostic category, replacing it with the chronic vegetative state., (© 2019 The Hastings Center.)

Some jurisdictions that have decriminalized assisted dying (like Canada) exclude psychiatric patients on the grounds that their condition cannot be determined to be irremediable, that they are vulnerable and in need of protection, or that they cannot be determined to be competent. We review each of these claims and find that none have been sufficiently well-supported to justify the differential treatment psychiatric patients experience with respect to assisted dying. We find bans on psychiatric patients' access to this service amount to arbitrary discrimination. Proponents of banning the practice ignore or overlook alternatives to their proposal, like an assisted dying regime with additional safeguards. Some authors have further criticized assisted dying for psychiatric patients by highlighting allegedly problematic practices in those countries which allow it. We address recent evidence from the Netherlands, showing that these problems are either misrepresented or have straightforward solutions. Even if one finds such evidence troubling despite our analysis, other jurisdictions need not adopt every feature of the Dutch system.

From the start, I followed the case of Jahi McMath with great interest. In December 2013, she clearly fulfilled the diagnostic criteria for brain death. As a neurologist with a special interest in chronic brain death, I was not surprised that, after she was flown to New Jersey, where she became statutorily resurrected and was treated as a comatose patient, Jahi's condition quickly improved. In 2014, her family reported that she sometimes responded to simple motor commands. I shared the general skepticism regarding these reports, assuming that the family was in denial and was misinterpreting spinal myoclonus (a rapid, involuntary twitch generated by the spinal cord) as volitional. The family had noticed that when Jahi's heart rate was above eighty beats per minute, she was more likely to respond, as though the heart rate reflected some sort of inner level of arousal. So they began to make video recordings. I have been privileged to be entrusted with copies of these recordings, forty-eight of which proved suitable for assessing alleged responsiveness. All have been certified by a forensic video expert as unaltered. The first thing that struck me was that the great majority of the alleged responses were not spinal myoclonus. In fact, they did not resemble any type of spontaneous, involuntary movement described in patients paralyzed from high spinal cord lesions., (© 2018 The Hastings Center.)

Jahi McMath's case has raised challenging uncertainties about one of the most profound existential questions that we can ask: how do we know whether someone is alive or dead? The case is striking in at least two ways. First, how can it be that a person diagnosed as dead by qualified physicians continued to live, at least in a biological sense, more than four years after a death certificate was issued? Second, the diagnosis of brain death has been considered irreversible; in fact, there has never been a case of a person correctly diagnosed as brain-dead who improved to the point that the person no longer fulfilled the diagnostic criteria. If the neurologist Alan Shewmon is correct that, prior to her cardiac arrest in June 2018, McMath no longer met the criteria for brain death and was actually in a minimally conscious state, this case could have momentous implications for how we think about this diagnosis going forward. In this essay, I will offer a hypothesis that could, perhaps, explain both these aspects of the case. The hypothesis is based on differences in how we distinguish between biological and legal categories. The law tends to prefer to draw bright-line distinctions between categories, whereas biological categories tend to fall along a spectrum, without sharp distinctions., (© 2018 The Hastings Center.)

For nearly five years, bioethicists and neurologists debated whether Jahi McMath, an African American teenager, was alive or dead. While Jahi's condition provides a compelling study for analyzing brain death, circumscribing her life status to a question of brain death fails to acknowledge and respond to a chronic, if uncomfortable, bioethics problem in American health care-namely, racial bias and unequal treatment, both real and perceived. Bioethicists should examine the underlying, arguably broader social implications of what Jahi's medical treatment and experience represented. On any given day, disparities in the quality of health care and health outcomes for people of color in comparison to whites are evidenced in American hospitals and clinics. These disparities are not entirely explained by differences in patient education, insurance status, employment, income, expressed preference for treatments, and severity of disease. Instead, research indicates that, even for African Americans able to gain access to health care services and navigate institutional nuances, disparities persist across a broad range of services, including diagnostic screening and general medical care, mental health diagnosis and treatment, pain management, HIV-related care, and treatments for cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and kidney disease., (© 2018 The Hastings Center.)

English law mandates a duty of candour (DOC) for all healthcare providers. They must be open and honest when something goes wrong with care causing harm. Providers must apologize to those affected and investigate what happened. Screening is not 100% accurate and false positive and false negative results are inevitable. Guidance on DOC assists providers to judge when something has gone wrong in screening and the DOC legislation applies. DOC guidance helps distinguish such incidents from harms that are an expected and inevitable consequence of the imperfections of screening tests. For breast cancer screening the classification of interval cancers has been updated to take account of DOC. This guidance on DOC and classification of prior films of those presenting with interval cancers has relevance to other areas of diagnostic imaging. Review of prior examinations after a significant diagnosis has been made may reveal a previously overlooked abnormality.

The case of BB, an 11-year-old girl who was hospitalized because of sudden odd seizure-like symptoms and catatonic affect, highlights several ethical issues and communication problems. The correct diagnosis was initially missed, partly because physicians are trained to think of the most common explanation for a patient's symptoms; the medical education truism "when you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras" was not helpful in BB's case. The common habit of medical professionals to not revisit a diagnosis once one is established also led to missed opportunities to provide appropriate care for this young patient. The difficulty nurses and/or family members have in questioning a diagnosis and treatment plan are also discussed.

Advances in prenatal diagnosis create a unique set of clinical ethics dilemmas. Doctors routinely obtain genetic screening, radiologic images, and biophysical profiling. These allow more accurate diagnosis and prognosis than has ever before been possible. However, they also reveal a wider range of disease manifestations than were apparent when prenatal diagnosis was less sophisticated. Sometimes, the best estimates of prognosis turn out to be wrong. The infant's symptoms may be less severe or more severe than anticipated based on prenatal assessment. We present a case in which a prenatal diagnosis was made of severe osteogenesis imperfecta, leading to a decision to induce delivery at 31 weeks. On postnatal evaluation, the infant's disease did not appear to be as bad as had been anticipated. We discuss the ethical implications of such diagnostic and prognostic errors., (Copyright © 2016 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

Objective: To assess the ability of the national case definition to identify infectious syphilis during an outbreak affecting predominantly Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in a remote Australian region., Methods: A retrospective case series study of all non-congenital syphilis cases in the region notified between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2012 was performed. The national infectious syphilis case definition was compared with an expanded case definition derived from experienced clinician assessment and the definition proposed in the Interim Guidelines for the Public Health Management of Syphilis Outbreaks in Remote Populations in Australia from the Communicable Diseases Network Australia (CDNA)., Results: Two hundred and forty syphilis cases were notified, of which 44 (18.3%) were symptomatic. The national case definition classified 106 (44.2%) cases as infectious, compared with 182 (75.8%) using the clinician-derived expanded case definition and 165 (68.8%) by the interim guidelines case definition. Seven confirmed and 6 probable cases were diagnosed as a result of contact tracing of probable infectious cases identified using the expanded case definition., Conclusions and Implications: The national case definition for infectious syphilis applied in this remote Australian outbreak underestimated infectious cases when compared with experienced clinicians' evaluation by up to 76 cases (42%) and was inadequate to monitor the magnitude of a syphilis outbreak in such a setting. This may compromise surveillance and resource allocation decisions, and could reduce the capacity to interrupt transmission and contain an outbreak. A revised national case definition, informed by this analysis, was released by CDNA in July 2015.

Examined as an isolated situation, and through the lens of a rare and feared disease, Mr. Duncan's case seems ripe for second-guessing the physicians and nurses who cared for him. But viewed from the perspective of what we know about errors and team communication, his case is all too common. Nearly 440,000 patient deaths in the U.S. each year may be attributable to medical errors. Breakdowns in communication among health care teams contribute in the majority of these errors. The culture of health care does not seem to foster functional, effective communication between and among professionals. Why? And more importantly, why do we not do something about it?

While the medical ethics literature has well explored the harm to patients, families, and the integrity of the profession in failing to disclose medical errors once they occur, less often addressed are the moral and professional obligations to take all available steps to prevent errors and harm in the first instance. As an expanding body of scholarship further elucidates the causes of medical error, including the considerable extent to which medical errors, particularly in diagnostics, may be attributable to cognitive sources, insufficient progress in systematically evaluating and implementing suggested strategies for improving critical thinking skills and medical judgment is of mounting concern. Continued failure to address pervasive thinking errors in medical decisionmaking imperils patient safety and professionalism, as well as beneficence and nonmaleficence, fairness and justice. We maintain that self-reflective and metacognitive refinement of critical thinking should not be construed as optional but rather should be considered an integral part of medical education, a codified tenet of professionalism, and by extension, a moral and professional duty.

DIFFICULTIES OF BEHAVIORAL ASSESSMENT OF CONSCIOUSNESS: An astonishingly high rate of misdiagnosis between vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome and minimally conscious state has been detected. This raises the issue of the adequacy of the consciousness' assessment in patients with disorders of consciousness. The behavioral assessment of consciousness could be not able to detect covert awareness, which is increasingly identified by the instrumental assessment. ANCILLARY METHODS: Neurotechnology, particularly neuroimaging, provides relevant data concerning the neurological underlying condition of patients with DOCs, but the instrumental approach has still to assess some technical issues., Ethical Considerations: A correct diagnosis of a DOC is not only an instrumental issue, but also an ethically relevant demand to the scientific community. Finally, an integration between behavioral and instrumental assessments seems to be the most adequate strategy in order to decrease the rate of misdiagnosis.

Objectives: The increase in the prevalence of medical errors represents a disturbing trend; hospital-based errors are the eighth leading cause of death in the United States. For the clinical laboratory, errors that occur in the preanalytical phase of testing may account for up to 75% of total laboratory errors; 26% of these may have detrimental effects on patient care, which contribute to unnecessary investigations or inappropriate treatment, increase in lengths of hospital stay, as well as dissatisfaction with healthcare services. This review focuses on these errors, particularly those observed in the preanalytical phase, and how they may affect clinical and financial outcomes. Financial ramifications are also demonstrated through a model that estimates the costs of preanalytical errors for the hospital and laboratory as well as patient care., (Copyright © 2013 The Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This article focuses on the radiology report and examines how related errors can affect patient care even though the radiologist might resist disclosing or discussing reporting errors in a patient-centered way. By using scenarios involving issues in reporting, we hope to show how various ethical theories support the obligation of a radiologist to provide an honest, complete report and to ensure that errors are disclosed to patients., Conclusion: Radiologists should be willing to make corrections when necessary and ethical theories and principles are available to guide them in their duty to care for their patients. Physicians owe it to their patients, their patients' families, and the medical profession to produce an honest and truthful report. Despite temptations to deviate from ethically appropriate action, physicians must make honesty to their patients and reporting of errors a priority. Few patients expect absolute perfection from their physicians, but honesty and truthfulness in reporting will advance physician-patient and physician-physician relationships and can foster optimal patient care.

The difficulty of diagnosing multiple sclerosis (MS) has been well documented. However, recent data also suggests that neurologists frequently encounter the clinical challenge of having to undo a misdiagnosis of MS. Undiagnosing MS has important clinical, psychosocial, and economic consequences for the patient, the treating neurologist, and the healthcare system at large. This article presents a case of misdiagnosed MS and discusses ethical challenges and obligations for the neurologist.

Forensic medicine is a fundamental science for a good evolution of the law and a serious protection of citizens. This science is also inextricably linked to public health. As basic discipline, we consider useful to revisit homicides which escape the investigators'sagacity and especially to know the reasons of this missing. Forensic high quality depends on respect of the crime scene, through specialized training and above all the recognition of this crucial discipline in our contemporary society.

Objective: To assess the views of psychotherapists regarding management of treatment errors by reviewing and analyzing interviews with therapists., Methods: A literature search was used to identify topics for the interview guide. Semi-structured interviews with 30 psychotherapists were conducted and analyzed according to qualitative content analysis, a framework approach., Results: Psychotherapists report an open approach to handling treatment errors: the majority claim that they would discuss errors with their patients. Experiences with error disclosure were on the whole rather positive. Errors of colleagues would be discussed in a supervisory way or, in more serious cases, be reported., Conclusion: In psychotherapy, a constructive and open handling of errors seems to prevail. Therapists tend to be cautious when judging errors of colleagues., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Diagnostic discrepancies occur when the diagnosis made on a biospecimen during the course of review at a biobank differs from the original clinical diagnosis. These diagnostic discrepancies detected during biobanking present unique challenges that are distinct from other types of research results or incidental findings. The proposed process for reporting diagnostic discrepancies or pathological incidental findings identified through a quality assurance evaluation at the biobank includes verification of the biospecimen identity, verification of the diagnosis within the biobank, and re-review of the case by the pathologist at the biospecimen collection site. If the pathologist at the biobank and the original pathologist do not reach agreement, an impartial and knowledgeable third party is consulted. The decision as to whether and how to notify research participants of any confirmed changes in diagnosis would be determined by institutional procedures. Implementation of this proposed process will require clear delineation of the roles and responsibilities of all involved parties in order to promote excellence in patient care and ensure that researchers have access to biospecimens of requisite quality.Genet Med 2012:14(4):417-423.

Although dermatology does not lead the list of specialties most commonly sued for malpractice, anyone who has been the recipient of a malpractice claim is often traumatized both personally and professionally. Every day dermatologists must address various ethical concerns that have legal implications. Herein, we chose to discuss the following such issues: (1) the ethical and legal necessity of submitting a clinically benign appearing lesion for dermatopathologic review; (2) the ethical and legal considerations regarding frequency of screening after a patient has been diagnosed with melanoma; (3) the multiple ethical and legal considerations involved with the misdiagnosis of a melanoma; (4) the complex ethical and legal considerations of a dermatologist making a clinical diagnosis in a nonprofessional social and public setting; and (5) the ethical and legal implications of sharing care of patients with other dermatologists and specialists., (Copyright © 2012. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

This paper identifies some ethical concerns regarding the Revised National Tuberculosis Control Programme (RNTCP). Only 10% of those with chest symptoms visiting public health facilities get specific treatment as they are diagnosed with TB. The remaining 90% who suffer from non-TB diseases are not given scientific treatment. This compartmental approach denies treatment to millions of people with chest symptoms. It has also eroded the popularity of public health facilities. Second, though 87% of those diagnosed on the basis of x-ray alone are unlikely to have TB, such unethical wrong diagnoses continue to be carried out under the TB programme. Still worse, the RNTCP's expectation that only half of TB cases should be smear positive effectively permits up to 50% of diagnoses to be wrong. The actual extent of wrong diagnosis is even higher as the majority of people with chest symptoms first visit private health facilities which base their diagnosis almost exclusively on radiological examination. Third, though 25% to 33% of TB cases get cured spontaneously, and at least two-thirds were cured even with incomplete treatment, the RNTCP insists on full treatment for all TB cases. This over-treatment is unethical, wasteful and also tantamount to scientific dishonesty. Studies to identify different categories of cases (those needing full treatment, short treatment or no treatment) have not been attempted. The introduction (under the RNTCP) of the "success rate"in preference to the well recognised "cure rate" was unethical and unwarranted. "Crying wolf" over Multiple Drug Resistant (MDR) TB to justify DOTS when there is no apparent alarming increase in the incidence of initial MDR tuberculosis cases is also questionable. Other ethical concerns about the RNTCP include the irrational choice of districts leading to exclusion of those that need the services most; exclusion of diagnosed patients from the DOTS scheme, and exclusion from treatment on non-medical grounds. Such exclusions can be up to 58% of TB cases.

Hypothyroidism presenting as ascites is one of the rarest clinical scenarios encountered in medical practice. A case of a 65-year-old woman, presenting with progressive onset ascites, secondary to underlying hypothyroidism, which responded to thyroid hormone replacement therapy is reported. A feature of hypothyroidism Induced ascites is the high protein content of the ascitic fluid (> 2.5 g/dl), a high serum albumin ascites gradient (SAAG) and the consistent drastic response of ascites to thyroid hormone replacement. Hypothyroid ascites is thus a very rare manifestation of the primary disease, but should be borne in mind when other causes of ascites are ruled out and the ascitic fluid shows typical features.

Current symptom-based DSM and ICD diagnostic criteria for mental disorders are prone to yielding false positives because they ignore the context of symptoms. This is often seen as a benign flaw because problems of living and emotional suffering, even if not true disorders, may benefit from support and treatment. However, diagnosis of a disorder in our society has many ramifications not only for treatment choice but for broader social reactions to the diagnosed individual. In particular, mental disorders impose a sick role on individuals and place a burden upon them to change; thus, disorders decrease the level of respect and acceptance generally accorded to those with even annoying normal variations in traits and features. Thus, minimizing false positives is important to a pluralistic society. The harmful dysfunction analysis of disorder is used to diagnose the sources of likely false positives, and propose potential remedies to the current weaknesses in the validity of diagnostic criteria.

The different causes of misdiagnosis in psychiatry are reviewed, and the ethical implications of such misdiagnoses are discussed.

Background: Histopathologic criterion for follicular variant of papillary thyroid cancer (FVPTC) has only recently been utilized universally. The purpose was to determine whether, on review, these criteria would result in a change in diagnosis of follicular neoplasm (FN)., Methods: A ten-year clinical cohort included patients with a diagnosis of a follicular adenoma, follicular carcinoma (FC), or FVPTC. The archived sections were re-examined by two pathologists blinded to the original diagnoses. Clinical follow-up, including ultrasonography, was carried out on all patients with a change in diagnosis., Results: One hundred eighty-five patients met the inclusion criteria. Initially, 118 were benign, 56 were FVPTC, and 11 were FC. Overall, 46 (25%) patients had a change in diagnosis on re-review; 35 were reclassified from a benign diagnosis to a re-reviewed malignant diagnosis, with 5 reclassified as minimally invasive FC, 4 as occult PTC, and 26 (74%) as FVPTC. Of the 26 FVPTC, only 10 (38%) had undergone a total thyroidectomy (TT). The mean follow-up was 105 months (range, 24-156). None of these patients had evidence of recurrent or persistent disease. Eleven patients were reclassified to a benign diagnosis. Eight have undergone a TT, with 3 of these patients receiving I(131) ablation therapy. A third independent thyroid pathologist also reviewed the histopathologic slides of these 46 patients and concurred with the change in diagnosis in 41 of the 46 patients., Conclusions: Reclassification of FN increased malignant lesions from 36% to 48%. Although there have been no clinical ramifications in the patients with a changed diagnosis, the ethical issues surrounding these 46 patients are important and present a substantive quandary to the clinicians responsible for their care.