Suppr超能文献

《残疾4.0:关于具身人工智能使用的生物伦理考量》

Disability 4.0: bioethical considerations on the use of embodied artificial intelligence.

作者信息

De Micco Francesco, Tambone Vittoradolfo, Frati Paola, Cingolani Mariano, Scendoni Roberto

机构信息

Research Unit of Bioethics and Humanities, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University Campus Bio-Medico of Rome, Rome, Italy.

Operative Research Unit of Clinical Affairs, Healthcare Bioethics Center, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.

出版信息

Front Med (Lausanne). 2024 Aug 16;11:1437280. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1437280. eCollection 2024.

Abstract

Robotics and artificial intelligence have marked the beginning of a new era in the care and integration of people with disabilities, helping to promote their independence, autonomy and social participation. In this area, bioethical reflection assumes a key role at anthropological, ethical, legal and socio-political levels. However, there is currently a substantial diversity of opinions and ethical arguments, as well as a lack of consensus on the use of assistive robots, while the focus remains predominantly on the usability of products. The article presents a bioethical analysis that highlights the risk arising from using embodied artificial intelligence according to a functionalist model. Failure to recognize disability as the result of a complex interplay between health, personal and situational factors could result in potential damage to the intrinsic dignity of the person and human relations with healthcare workers. Furthermore, the danger of discrimination in accessing these new technologies is highlighted, emphasizing the need for an ethical approach that considers the social and moral implications of implementing embodied AI in the field of rehabilitation.

摘要

机器人技术和人工智能标志着残疾人护理与融入领域新时代的开端,有助于促进他们的独立、自主和社会参与。在这一领域,生物伦理反思在人类学、伦理、法律和社会政治层面发挥着关键作用。然而,目前存在着大量不同的观点和伦理论据,在辅助机器人的使用上也缺乏共识,而关注点仍主要集中在产品的可用性上。本文提出了一项生物伦理分析,强调了按照功能主义模式使用具身人工智能所产生的风险。未能认识到残疾是健康、个人和情境因素之间复杂相互作用的结果,可能会对人的内在尊严以及与医护人员的人际关系造成潜在损害。此外,文中还强调了在获取这些新技术方面存在歧视的危险,强调需要一种伦理方法,来考量在康复领域应用具身人工智能所带来的社会和道德影响。

相似文献

4
[The origin of informed consent].[知情同意的起源]
Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2005 Oct;25(5):312-27.
7
Can nurses in clinical practice ascribe responsibility to intelligent robots?临床护士能否对智能机器人负责?
Nurs Ethics. 2022 Sep;29(6):1457-1465. doi: 10.1177/09697330221090591. Epub 2022 Jun 21.

本文引用的文献

2
Call for the responsible artificial intelligence in the healthcare.呼吁在医疗保健中使用负责任的人工智能。
BMJ Health Care Inform. 2023 Dec 21;30(1):e100920. doi: 10.1136/bmjhci-2023-100920.
8
Clinical decision-making and algorithmic inequality.临床决策与算法不平等。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2023 Sep;32(9):495-497. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2022-015874. Epub 2023 Jun 8.
10
Toward More Inclusive Work Organizations by Redesigning Work.通过重新设计工作来实现更具包容性的工作组织。
Front Rehabil Sci. 2022 May 31;3:861561. doi: 10.3389/fresc.2022.861561. eCollection 2022.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验