This paper conducts a comparative analysis of data governance mechanisms concerning the secondary use of health data in Taiwan and the European Union (EU). Both regions have adopted distinctive approaches and regulations for utilizing health data beyond primary care, encompassing areas such as medical research and healthcare system enhancement. Through an examination of these models, this study seeks to elucidate the strategies, frameworks, and legal structures employed by Taiwan and the EU to strike a delicate balance between the imperative of data-driven healthcare innovation and the safeguarding of individual privacy rights. This paper examines and compares several key aspects of the secondary use of health data in Taiwan and the EU. These aspects include data governance frameworks, legal and regulatory frameworks, data access and sharing mechanisms, and privacy and security considerations. This comparative exploration offers invaluable insights into the evolving global landscape of health data governance. It provides a deeper understanding of the strategies implemented by these regions to harness the potential of health data while upholding the ethical and legal considerations surrounding its secondary use. The findings aim to inform best practices for responsible and effective health data utilization, particularly in the context of medical AI applications.

暂无摘要。

Trustworthy medical AI requires transparency about the development and testing of underlying algorithms to identify biases and communicate potential risks of harm. Abundant guidance exists on how to achieve transparency for medical AI products, but it is unclear whether publicly available information adequately informs about their risks. To assess this, we retrieved public documentation on the 14 available CE-certified AI-based radiology products of the II b risk category in the EU from vendor websites, scientific publications, and the European EUDAMED database. Using a self-designed survey, we reported on their development, validation, ethical considerations, and deployment caveats, according to trustworthy AI guidelines. We scored each question with either 0, 0.5, or 1, to rate if the required information was \"unavailable\", \"partially available,\" or \"fully available.\" The transparency of each product was calculated relative to all 55 questions. Transparency scores ranged from 6.4% to 60.9%, with a median of 29.1%. Major transparency gaps included missing documentation on training data, ethical considerations, and limitations for deployment. Ethical aspects like consent, safety monitoring, and GDPR-compliance were rarely documented. Furthermore, deployment caveats for different demographics and medical settings were scarce. In conclusion, public documentation of authorized medical AI products in Europe lacks sufficient public transparency to inform about safety and risks. We call on lawmakers and regulators to establish legally mandated requirements for public and substantive transparency to fulfill the promise of trustworthy AI for health.

To investigate opinions and attitudes of medical professionals towards adopting AI-enabled healthcare technologies in their daily business, we used a mixed-methods approach. Study 1 employed a qualitative computational grounded theory approach analyzing 181 Reddit threads in the several subreddits of r/medicine. By utilizing an unsupervised machine learning clustering method, we identified three key themes: (1) consequences of AI, (2) physician-AI relationship, and (3) a proposed way forward. In particular Reddit posts related to the first two themes indicated that the medical professionals\' fear of being replaced by AI and skepticism toward AI played a major role in the argumentations. Moreover, the results suggest that this fear is driven by little or moderate knowledge about AI. Posts related to the third theme focused on factual discussions about how AI and medicine have to be designed to become broadly adopted in health care. Study 2 quantitatively examined the relationship between the fear of AI, knowledge about AI, and medical professionals\' intention to use AI-enabled technologies in more detail. Results based on a sample of 223 medical professionals who participated in the online survey revealed that the intention to use AI technologies increases with increasing knowledge about AI and that this effect is moderated by the fear of being replaced by AI.

The escalating integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in clinical settings carries profound implications for the doctrine of informed consent, presenting challenges that necessitate immediate attention. China, in its advancement in the deployment of medical AI, is proactively engaging in the formulation of legal and ethical regulations. This paper takes China as an example to undertake a theoretical examination rooted in the principles of medical ethics and legal norms, analyzing informed consent and medical AI through relevant literature data. The study reveals that medical AI poses fundamental challenges to the accuracy, adequacy, and objectivity of information disclosed by doctors, alongside impacting patient competency and willingness to give consent. To enhance adherence to informed consent rules in the context of medical AI, this paper advocates for a shift towards a patient-centric information disclosure standard, the restructuring of medical liability rules, the augmentation of professional training, and the advancement of public understanding through educational initiatives.

Medical AI has transformed modern medicine and created a new environment for future doctors. However, medical education has failed to keep pace with these advances, and it is essential to provide systematic education on medical AI to current medical undergraduate and postgraduate students. To address this issue, our study utilized the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology model to identify key factors that influence the acceptance and intention to use medical AI. We collected data from 1,243 undergraduate and postgraduate students from 13 universities and 33 hospitals, and 54.3% reported prior experience using medical AI. Our findings indicated that medical postgraduate students have a higher level of awareness in using medical AI than undergraduate students. The intention to use medical AI is positively associated with factors such as performance expectancy, habit, hedonic motivation, and trust. Therefore, future medical education should prioritize promoting students\' performance in training, and courses should be designed to be both easy to learn and engaging, ensuring that students are equipped with the necessary skills to succeed in their future medical careers.

Modern artificial intelligence (AI) approaches mainly rely on neural network (NN) or deep NN methodologies. However, these approaches require large amounts of data to train, given, that the number of their trainable parameters has a polynomial relationship to their neuron counts. This property renders deep NNs challenging to apply in fields operating with small, albeit representative datasets such as healthcare. In this paper, we propose a novel neural network architecture which trains spatial positions of neural soma and axon pairs, where weights are calculated by axon-soma distances of connected neurons. We refer to this method as distance-encoding biomorphic-informational (DEBI) neural network. This concept significantly minimizes the number of trainable parameters compared to conventional neural networks. We demonstrate that DEBI models can yield comparable predictive performance in tabular and imaging datasets, where they require a fraction of trainable parameters compared to conventional NNs, resulting in a highly scalable solution.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology has been developed significantly in recent years. The fairness of medical AI is of great concern due to its direct relation to human life and health. This review aims to analyze the existing research literature on fairness in medical AI from the perspectives of computer science, medical science, and social science (including law and ethics). The objective of the review is to examine the similarities and differences in the understanding of fairness, explore influencing factors, and investigate potential measures to implement fairness in medical AI across English and Chinese literature.
This study employed a scoping review methodology and selected the following databases: Web of Science, MEDLINE, Pubmed, OVID, CNKI, WANFANG Data, etc., for the fairness issues in medical AI through February 2023. The search was conducted using various keywords such as \"artificial intelligence,\" \"machine learning,\" \"medical,\" \"algorithm,\" \"fairness,\" \"decision-making,\" and \"bias.\" The collected data were charted, synthesized, and subjected to descriptive and thematic analysis.
After reviewing 468 English papers and 356 Chinese papers, 53 and 42 were included in the final analysis. Our results show the three different disciplines all show significant differences in the research on the core issues. Data is the foundation that affects medical AI fairness in addition to algorithmic bias and human bias. Legal, ethical, and technological measures all promote the implementation of medical AI fairness.
Our review indicates a consensus regarding the importance of data fairness as the foundation for achieving fairness in medical AI across multidisciplinary perspectives. However, there are substantial discrepancies in core aspects such as the concept, influencing factors, and implementation measures of fairness in medical AI. Consequently, future research should facilitate interdisciplinary discussions to bridge the cognitive gaps between different fields and enhance the practical implementation of fairness in medical AI.

UNASSIGNED: Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies are transforming medicine and healthcare. Scholars and practitioners have debated the philosophical, ethical, legal, and regulatory implications of medical AI, and empirical research on stakeholders\' knowledge, attitude, and practices has started to emerge. This study is a systematic review of published empirical studies of medical AI ethics with the goal of mapping the main approaches, findings, and limitations of scholarship to inform future practice considerations.
UNASSIGNED: We searched seven databases for published peer-reviewed empirical studies on medical AI ethics and evaluated them in terms of types of technologies studied, geographic locations, stakeholders involved, research methods used, ethical principles studied, and major findings.
UNASSIGNED: Thirty-six studies were included (published 2013-2022). They typically belonged to one of the three topics: exploratory studies of stakeholder knowledge and attitude toward medical AI, theory-building studies testing hypotheses regarding factors contributing to stakeholders\' acceptance of medical AI, and studies identifying and correcting bias in medical AI.
UNASSIGNED: There is a disconnect between high-level ethical principles and guidelines developed by ethicists and empirical research on the topic and a need to embed ethicists in tandem with AI developers, clinicians, patients, and scholars of innovation and technology adoption in studying medical AI ethics.

ChatGPT is a foundation Artificial Intelligence (AI) model that has opened up new opportunities in digital healthcare. Particularly, it can serve as a co-pilot tool for doctors in the interpretation, summarization, and completion of reports. Furthermore, it can build upon the ability to access the large literature and knowledge on the internet. So, chatGPT could generate acceptable responses for the medical examination. Hence. It offers the possibility of enhancing healthcare accessibility, expandability, and effectiveness. Nonetheless, chatGPT is vulnerable to inaccuracies, false information, and bias. This paper briefly describes the potential of Foundation AI models to transform future healthcare by presenting ChatGPT as an example tool.