“The Death of Medicine as an Art of Humanity”. Multi-Level Ethical Implications of Integrating Mortality Prediction Algorithms in End-of-Life Care

Authors

  • Jad Brake School of Nursing, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1514-1952
  • Kelly Newton-Mari Health Quality Program, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
  • Alice Virani Clinical Ethics and Spiritual Care Service, Provincial Health Services Authority; Department of Medical Genetics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1374-3172
  • Anita Ho Centre for Advancing Health Outcomes, St. Paul’s Hospital, Vancouver; Applied Ethics/School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9797-1326

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7202/1126616ar

Keywords:

ethics, artificial intelligence, predictive algorithms, end-of-life care, mortality

Language(s):

English

Abstract

Artificial intelligence-powered mortality predictive algorithms (MPAs) have been developed to predict a patient’s life expectancy, with the hope that algorithmic outputs will help providers to find an optimal time to initiate end-of-life (EoL) conversations to enhance goal-concordant care. This qualitative research, conducted in British Columbia (BC), Canada, examines health care providers’ perspectives on ethical implications of using AI-powered MPAs in EoL care. This paper discusses how MPAs raise familiar but also new multi-level ethical issues regarding the use of predictive analytics in clinical medicine. These ethical concerns and considerations span four levels: individual, professional, organizational, and societal. Our analysis of these interconnected levels reveals three key and overlapping insights: 1) the need to redefine clinicians’ roles within a changing techno-therapeutic landscape; 2) the challenge of navigating EoL hope in the context of emerging predictive tools; and 3) the importance of fostering a balanced and holistic approach to EoL care amid rapid advances in AI. By uncovering the complexity of ethical implications of using MPAs in the sensitive and vulnerable context of the final stages of a person’s life, this work provides a multi-level framework that can inform best practices. It also underscores a holistic view of care and stresses the need for ethical frameworks, guidelines, interdisciplinary collaboration and education to inform the design and implementation of MPAs in EoL care.

References

1. Adegbesan A, Akingbola A, Ojo O, et al. Ethical challenges in the integration of artificial intelligence in palliative care. J Med Surg Public Health. 2024;4:100158.

2. World Health Organisation. Strengthening of palliative care as a component of integrated treatment within the continuum of care. WHO. 20 Dec 2013.

3. Davenport T, Kalakota R. The potential for artificial intelligence in healthcare. Future Heal J. 2019;6(2):94-8.

4. Oh O, Demiris G, Ulrich CM. The ethical dimensions of utilizing Artificial Intelligence in palliative care. Nurs Ethics. 2025;32(4):1285-96.

5. Rajkomar A, Oren E, Chen K, et al. Scalable and accurate deep learning with electronic health records. Npj Digit Med. 2018;1:18.

6. Elfiky AA, Pany MJ, Parikh RB, Obermeyer Z. Development and application of a machine learning approach to assess short-term mortality risk among patients with cancer starting chemotherapy. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1(3):e180926.

7. Cary MP, Zhuang F, Draelos RL, et al. Machine learning algorithms to predict mortality and allocate palliative care for older patients with hip fracture. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2021;22(2):291-6.

8. Wang L, Sha L, Lakin JR, et al. Development and validation of a deep learning algorithm for mortality prediction in selecting patients with dementia for earlier palliative care interventions. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(7):e196972.

9. Blom MC, Ashfaq A, Sant’Anna A, Anderson PD, Lingman M. Training machine learning models to predict 30-day mortality in patients discharged from the emergency department: a retrospective, population-based registry study. BMJ Open. 2019;9(8):e028015.

10. Thorsen-Meyer HC, Nielsen AB, Nielsen AP, et al. Dynamic and explainable machine learning prediction of mortality in patients in the intensive care unit: a retrospective study of high-frequency data in electronic patient records. Lancet Digit Health. 2020;2(4):e179-91.

11. Naemi A, Schmidt T, Mansourvar M, et al. Machine learning techniques for mortality prediction in emergency departments: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2021;11(11):e052663.

12. Romero-Brufau S, Wyatt KD, Boyum P, et al. Implementation of artificial intelligence-based clinical decision support to reduce hospital readmissions at a regional hospital. Appl Clin Inform. 2020;11(4):570-7.

13. Avati A, Jung K, Harman S, et al. Improving palliative care with deep learning. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2018;18(S4):122.

14. De Panfilis L, Peruselli C, Tanzi S, Botrugno C. AI-based clinical decision-making systems in palliative medicine: ethical challenges. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2023;13(2):183-9.

15. Feldman E, De Cremer D. Preserving physician ethics in the era of autonomous AI. AI Ethics. 2025;5(3):3415-20.

16. Parikh RB, Manz C, Chivers C, et al. Machine learning approaches to predict 6-month mortality among patients with cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(10):e1915997.

17. Kubi B, Istl AC, Lee KT, Conca-Cheng A, Johnston FM. Advance care planning in cancer: patient preferences for personnel and timing. JCO Oncol Pract. 2020;16(9):e875-83.

18. Postill G, Dent A, Dombroski J, et al. Perspectives of family medicine residents on artificial intelligence for survival estimation in patients with serious illness. PLOS Digit Health. 2025;4(7):e0000917.

19. Parikh RB, Hasler JS, Zhang Y, et al. Development of machine learning algorithms incorporating electronic health record data, patient-reported outcomes, or both to predict mortality for outpatients with cancer. JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2022;6:e2200073.

20. Petersson L, Vincent K, Svedberg P, Nygren JM, Larsson I. Ethical considerations in implementing AI for mortality prediction in the emergency department: linking theory and practice. Digit Health. 2023;9:20552076231206588.

21. Hildebrand RD, Chang DT, Ewongwoo AN, Ramchandran KJ, Gensheimer MF. Study of patient and physician attitudes toward automated prognostic models for patients with metastatic cancer. JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2023;7:e2300023.

22. Blease C, Kaptchuk TJ, Bernstein MH, et al. Artificial intelligence and the future of primary care: exploratory qualitative study of uk general practitioners’ views. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(3):e12802.

23. Petch J, Di S, Nelson W. Opening the black box: the promise and limitations of explainable machine learning in cardiology. Can J Cardiol. 2022;38(2):204-13.

24. Ahmad O, Mason S, Stanley S, Nwosu AC. Exploring perspectives of healthcare professionals on AI in palliative care: Qualitative interfview study. JMIR Hum Factors. 2025;12:e79514.

25. Krishnamurthy N, Besculides M, Gorbenko K, et al. Multidisciplinary clinician perceptions on utility of a machine learning tool (ALERT) to predict 6‐month mortality and improve end‐of‐life outcomes for advanced cancer patients. Cancer Med. 2025;14(5):e70137.

26. Tyskbo D, Nygren J. Reconfiguration of uncertainty: introducing AI for prediction of mortality at the emergency department. Soc Sci Med. 2024;359:117298.

27. Char DS, Abràmoff MD, Feudtner C. Identifying ethical considerations for machine learning healthcare applications. Am J Bioeth. 2020;20(11):7-17.

28. García Abejas A, Geraldes Santos D, Leite Costa F, et al. Ethical challenges and opportunities of ai in end-of-life palliative care: integrative review. Interact J Med Res. 2025;14:e73517.

29. Munive Jesus U. Incorporating artificial intelligence in palliative care: opportunities and challenges. Hosp Palliat Med Int J. 2024;7(3):81-3.

30. Vu E, Steinmann N, Schröder C, et al. Applications of machine learning in palliative care: a systematic review. Cancers. 2023;15(5):1596.

31. WHO Guidance. Ethics and Governance of Artificial Intelligence for Health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021.

32. Independent High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence. Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI. European Commission. 8 Apr 2019.

33. Cagliero D, Deuitch N, Shah N, Feudtner C, Char D. A framework to identify ethical concerns with ML-guided care workflows: a case study of mortality prediction to guide advance care planning. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2023;30(5):819-27.

34. Corfmat M, Martineau JT, Régis C. Hi-reward, high-risk technologies? An ethical and legal account of AI development in healthcare. BMC Med Ethics. 2025;26:4.

35. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77-101.

36. Creswell JW. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Los Angeles: SAGE; 2013.

37. Flick U. An Introduction to Qualitative Research. Los Angeles: Sage; 2014.

38. Ho A, Bavli I, Mahal R, McKeown MJ. Multi-level ethical considerations of artificial intelligence health monitoring for people living with parkinson’s disease. AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2023;15(3):178-91.

39. Manz CR, Chen J, Liu M, et al. Validation of a machine learning algorithm to predict 180-day mortality for outpatients with cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2020;6(11):1723-30.

40. Gajra A, Zettler ME, Miller KA, et al. Augmented intelligence to predict 30-day mortality in patients with cancer. Future Oncol. 2021;17(29):3797-807.

41. Lu SC, Xu C, Nguyen CH, et al. Machine learning-based short-term mortality prediction models for patients with cancer using electronic health record data: systematic review and critical appraisal. JMIR Med Inform. 2022;10(3):e33182.

42. Kourou K, Exarchos TP, Exarchos KP, Karamouzis MV, Fotiadis DI. Machine learning applications in cancer prognosis and prediction. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2015;13:8-17.

43. Beeksma M, Verberne S, Van Den Bosch A, et al. Predicting life expectancy with a long short-term memory recurrent neural network using electronic medical records. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2019;19:36.

44. Motwani M, Dey D, Berman DS, et al. Machine learning for prediction of all-cause mortality in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: a 5-year multicentre prospective registry analysis. Eur Heart J. 2017;38(7):500-7.

45. Ahmed MI, Spooner B, Isherwood J, et al. A systematic review of the barriers to the implementation of artificial intelligence in healthcare. Cureus. 2023;15(10):e46454.

46. Parikh RB, Manz CR, Nelson MN, et al. Clinician perspectives on machine learning prognostic algorithms in the routine care of patients with cancer: a qualitative study. Support Care Cancer. 2022;30(5):4363-72.

47. Hazarika I. Artificial intelligence: opportunities and implications for the health workforce. Int Health. 2020;12(4):241-5.

48. Bates DW, Saria S, Ohno-Machado L, Shah A, Escobar G. Big data in health care: Using analytics to identify and manage high-Rrisk and high-cost patients. Health Aff. 2014;33(7):1123-31.

49. Teo K, Yong CW, Chuah JH, et al. Current trends in readmission prediction: An overview of approaches. Arab J Sci Eng. 2023;48(8):11117-34.

50. Liu W, Stansbury C, Singh K, et al. Predicting 30-day hospital readmissions using artificial neural networks with medical code embedding. Liu N, editor. PLOS ONE. 2020;15(4):e0221606.

51. Topol EJ. Deep Medicine: How Artificial Intelligence Can Make Healthcare Human Again. New York: Basic Books; 2019.

52. Lim LJ, Tison GH, Delling FN. Artificial intelligence in cardiovascular imaging. Methodist DeBakey Cardiovasc J. 2020;16(2):138-45.

53. Topol EJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):44-56.

54. Ho A. Live Like Nobody Is Watching: Relational Autonomy in the Age of Artificial Intelligence and Health Monitoring. New York: Oxford University Press; 2023.

55. Akhras N, Antaki F, Mottet F, et al. Palliative Care Adversarial Dataset (PCAD). figshare; 2025.

56. Tschandl P, Rinner C, Apalla Z, et al. Human–computer collaboration for skin cancer recognition. Nat Med. 2020;26(8):1229-34.

57. Bond RR, Novotny T, Andrsova I, et al. Automation bias in medicine: the influence of automated diagnoses on interpreter accuracy and uncertainty when reading electrocardiograms. J Electrocardiol. 2018;51(6):S6-11.

58. Love CS. “Just the facts ma’am”: moral and ethical considerations for artificial intelligence in medicine and its potential to impact patient autonomy and hope. Linacre Q. 2023;90(4):375-94.

59. Laranjeira C, Dixe MA, Semeão I, et al. “Keeping the light on”: a qualitative study on hope perceptions at the end of life in portuguese family dyads. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(3):1561.

60. Kirk P, Kirk I, Kristjanson LJ. What do patients receiving palliative care for cancer and their families want to be told? A Canadian and Australian qualitative study BMJ. 2004;328(7452):1343.

61. Young AT, Amara D, Bhattacharya A, Wei ML. Patient and general public attitudes towards clinical artificial intelligence: a mixed methods systematic review. Lancet Digit Health. 2021;3(9):e599-611.

62. Balasubramanian S, Devarajan H, Raparthi M, et al. Ethical considerations in ai-assisted decision- making for end-of-life care in healthcare. Power Syst Technol. 2023;47(4):167-82.

63. Kamdar M, Lakin J, Zhang H. Artificial intelligence, machine learning, and digital therapeutics in palliative care and hospice: the future of compassionate care or rise of the robots? (TH363). J Pain Symptom Manage. 2020;59(2):434-5.

64. Ho A, Brake J, Palmer A, Binkley C. A holistic, multi-level, and integrative ethical approach to developing machine learning-driven decision aids. Am J Bioeth. 2024;24(9):110-3.

65. Mok E, Lau K, Lam W, Chan L, Ng J, Chan K. Health-care professionals’ perspective on hope in the palliative care setting. J Palliat Med. 2010;13(7):877-83.

66. Chau M, Rahman MG, Debnath T. From black box to clarity: strategies for effective AI informed consent in healthcare. Artif Intell Med. 2025;167:103169.

67. Moulaei K, Akhlaghpour S, Fatehi F. Patient consent for the secondary use of health data in artificial intelligence (AI) models: a scoping review. Int J Med Inf. 2025;198:105872.

68. Wang Y, Ma Z. Ethical and legal challenges of medical AI on informed consent: China as an example. Dev World Bioeth. 2025;25(1):46-54.

69. Pruski M. AI-enhanced healthcare: not a new paradigm for informed consent. J Bioethical Inq. 2024;21(3):475-89.

70. Ferrario A, Gloeckler S, Biller-Andorno N. Ethics of the algorithmic prediction of goal of care preferences: from theory to practice. J Med Ethics. 2023;49(3):165-74.

71. Palliative Care Coalition of Canada. Blueprint for Action: 2025–2030. PCCC; 2025.

© Han Han Li

Downloads

Published

2026-06-22

How to Cite

[1]
Brake J, Newton-Mari K, Virani A, Ho A. “The Death of Medicine as an Art of Humanity”. Multi-Level Ethical Implications of Integrating Mortality Prediction Algorithms in End-of-Life Care. Can. J. Bioeth 2026;9:21-38. https://doi.org/10.7202/1126616ar.

Issue

Vol. 9 No. 3 (2026): Open Issue

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Jad Brake, Kelly Newton-Mari, Alice Virani, Anita Ho

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The Canadian Journal of Bioethics applies the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License to all its publications. Authors therefore retain copyright of their publication, e.g., they can reuse their publication, link to it on their home page or institutional website, deposit a PDF in a public repository. However, the authors allow anyone to download, reuse, reprint, distribute, and/or copy their publication, so long as the original authors and source are cited.