Buhr Eike, Fischer Marc, Biernetzky Olga, Teipel Stefan, Gruber Oliver, Schweda Mark
Ethics in Medicine, https://ror.org/033n9gh91Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany.
Section for Experimental Psychopathology and Neuroimaging, https://ror.org/038t36y30Ruprecht Karl University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Eur Psychiatry. 2025 Aug 4;68(1):e105. doi: 10.1192/j.eurpsy.2025.10075.
The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in psychiatry holds promise for diagnosis, therapy, and the categorization of mental disorders. At the same time, it raises significant theoretical and ethical concerns. The debate appears polarized, with proponents and critics seemingly irreconcilably opposed. On the one hand, AI is heralded as a transformative force poised to revolutionize psychiatric research and practice. On the other hand, it is depicted as a harbinger of dehumanization. To better understand this dichotomy, it is essential to identify and critically examine the underlying arguments. To what extent does the use of AI challenge the theoretical assumptions of psychiatric diagnostics? What implications does it have for patient care, and how does it influence the professional self-concept of psychiatrists?
To explore these questions, we conducted 15 semi-structured interviews with experts from psychiatry, computer science, and philosophy. The findings were analyzed using a structuring qualitative content analysis.
The analysis focuses on the significance of AI for psychiatric diagnosis and care, as well as on its implications for the identity of psychiatry. We identified different lines of argument suggesting that expert views on AI in psychiatry hinge on the types of data considered relevant and on whether core human capacities in diagnosis and treatment are viewed as replicable by AI.
The results provide a mapping of diverse perspectives, offering a basis for more detailed analysis of theoretical and ethical issues of AI in psychiatry, as well as for the adaptation of psychiatric education.
人工智能(AI)在精神病学中的应用有望用于精神障碍的诊断、治疗和分类。与此同时,它引发了重大的理论和伦理问题。这场辩论似乎两极分化,支持者和批评者似乎势不两立。一方面,人工智能被誉为一股变革力量,有望彻底改变精神病学研究和实践。另一方面,它被描绘成非人性化的先兆。为了更好地理解这种二分法,识别并批判性地审视其潜在论点至关重要。人工智能的使用在多大程度上挑战了精神病诊断的理论假设?它对患者护理有何影响,又如何影响精神科医生的职业自我概念?
为了探讨这些问题,我们对来自精神病学、计算机科学和哲学领域的专家进行了15次半结构化访谈。采用结构化定性内容分析法对研究结果进行分析。
分析聚焦于人工智能对精神病诊断和护理的重要性,以及它对精神病学身份的影响。我们确定了不同的论点思路,表明专家对精神病学中人工智能的看法取决于所认为的相关数据类型,以及诊断和治疗中的核心人类能力是否被视为可被人工智能复制。
研究结果提供了不同观点的映射,为更详细地分析精神病学中人工智能的理论和伦理问题以及调整精神病学教育提供了基础。