University of Oxford.
National University of Singapore.
Am J Bioeth. 2024 Jul;24(7):13-26. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2023.2296402. Epub 2024 Jan 16.
When making substituted judgments for incapacitated patients, surrogates often struggle to guess what the patient would want if they had capacity. Surrogates may also agonize over having the (sole) responsibility of making such a determination. To address such concerns, a Patient Preference Predictor (PPP) has been proposed that would use an algorithm to infer the treatment preferences of individual patients from population-level data about the known preferences of people with similar demographic characteristics. However, critics have suggested that even if such a PPP were more accurate, on average, than human surrogates in identifying patient preferences, the proposed algorithm would nevertheless fail to respect the patient's (former) autonomy since it draws on the 'wrong' kind of data: namely, data that are not specific to the individual patient and which therefore may not reflect their actual values, or their reasons for having the preferences they do. Taking such criticisms on board, we here propose a new approach: the Patient Preference Predictor (P4). The P4 is based on recent advances in machine learning, which allow technologies including large language models to be more cheaply and efficiently 'fine-tuned' on person-specific data. The P4, unlike the PPP, would be able to infer an individual patient's preferences from material (e.g., prior treatment decisions) that is in fact specific to them. Thus, we argue, in addition to being potentially more accurate at the individual level than the previously proposed PPP, the predictions of a P4 would also more directly reflect each patient's own reasons and values. In this article, we review recent discoveries in artificial intelligence research that suggest a P4 is technically feasible, and argue that, if it is developed and appropriately deployed, it should assuage some of the main autonomy-based concerns of critics of the original PPP. We then consider various objections to our proposal and offer some tentative replies.
当为无行为能力的患者做出替代判断时,代理人常常难以猜测患者在有行为能力的情况下会想要什么。代理人也可能会为承担做出如此决定的(唯一)责任而痛苦不堪。为了解决这些问题,已经提出了一种患者偏好预测器(PPP),该预测器将使用算法从具有类似人口统计学特征的人群中关于已知偏好的患者的群体水平数据中推断出个体患者的治疗偏好。然而,批评者认为,即使这样的 PPP 在识别患者偏好方面平均比人类代理人更准确,该提议的算法仍将无法尊重患者的(以前的)自主权,因为它利用了“错误”的数据:即,不是特定于个体患者的数据,因此可能无法反映他们的实际价值观或他们拥有这些偏好的原因。为了接受这些批评,我们在此提出了一种新方法:患者偏好预测器(P4)。P4 基于机器学习的最新进展,这些进展使包括大型语言模型在内的技术能够更廉价、更有效地在特定于个人的数据上进行“微调”。与 PPP 不同,P4 能够从实际上特定于患者的材料(例如,先前的治疗决策)中推断出个体患者的偏好。因此,我们认为,除了在个体层面上可能比之前提出的 PPP 更准确之外,P4 的预测也将更直接地反映每个患者自己的原因和价值观。在本文中,我们回顾了人工智能研究中的最新发现,这些发现表明 P4 在技术上是可行的,并认为如果开发并适当部署,它应该可以减轻原始 PPP 批评者的一些主要基于自主权的担忧。然后,我们考虑了对我们的提案的各种反对意见,并提出了一些初步的答复。