Search

INTRODUCTION 377 I. AI: FROM INCEPTION TO MODERN DAY 378 A. HISTORY 378 B. CURRENT APPLICATIONS 381 C. REGULATION OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE 385 II. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN MEDICINE 387 A. [...], In an era marked by swift technological advancements, the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into the sphere of medicine shines as a beacon of hope. (1) This assimilation possesses the ability to generate a profound transformation, fundamentally altering the approach to healthcare. The concept of AI in medicine is not new. Still, advancements in computational proficiencies and data accessibility, linked with notable advancements in machine and deep learning algorithms, have created a vast array of opportunities for the future of healthcare. (2) This Article examines the multifaceted influences of AI in the healthcare field, delving into its contributions to diagnostics, treatment courses, patient care, and medical research. (3) AI is on the brink of reshaping the medical landscape and beginning a new period marked by personalized, data-driven medicine. (4) However, this metamorphosis raises many unexplored legal, ethical, and regulatory issues that must be resolved.

Purpose Of Review: This review explores the workings of the legal process in posttraumatic headache (PTH) claims by discussing representative court cases, the approaches taken by both plaintiff and defense attorneys in evaluating a client with PTH, and the role of the expert witness. This discussion also examines the question of whether or not litigation prolongs the symptoms of PTH and concussion, looking at the issues of malingering and the psychological effect of litigation.Recent Findings: Litigation prolongs recovery of PTH, primarily not from malingering but rather due to the psychological mindset of the plaintiff as created by the litigation process. Just as the medical community struggles with PTH diagnosis, mechanism, and treatment, the legal system grapples with identifying valid claims for PTH. Psychological support is an important component for PTH recovery to more effectively deal with the psychological impact of litigation and the concept of perceived injustice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Does a valid cause of action exist against a health care provider who intentionally disregards a "do-not resuscitate order," prolonging a patient's life? Wrongful prolongation of life has not gained traction in the United States. Although the issue has garnered media attention and has raised awareness of advanced directives, physicians still may disregard a patient's last wishes for fear of legal reprisal or due to lack of communication. This article examines key cases and explains the differences between living wills, advanced directives and proxies. Claims have been advanced under theories of battery, Constitutional violations, breach of contract, infliction of emotional distress, and negligence, but no cause of action has allowed monetary damages. Courts maintain that it is not their place to judge an impaired life as being less valuable than no life. A state-by-state analysis of legislation concerning advanced directives follows along with a discussion of the Patient Self-Determination Act.

Apology laws are gaining traction in the United States, prompting health care professionals to offer words of condolence for adverse medical outcomes without the fear of being sued for malpractice. Although these laws vary by jurisdiction, they have been shown to reduce the financial consequences of a medical malpractice lawsuit. The authors provide an overview of the laws regarding this issue and discuss apologies as a means to reduce medical malpractice claims.