“The Death of Medicine as an Art of Humanity”. Multi-Level Ethical Implications of Integrating Mortality Prediction Algorithms in End-of-Life Care
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.7202/1126616arMots-clés :
éthique, intelligence artificielle, algorithmes prédictifs, soins de fin de vie, mortalitéLangue(s) :
AnglaisRésumé
Des algorithmes de prédiction de la mortalité (APM) basés sur l’intelligence artificielle ont été développés pour estimer l’espérance de vie d’un patient, dans l’espoir que les résultats fournis par ces algorithmes aident les professionnels de santé à déterminer le moment optimal pour entamer des discussions sur la fin de vie, afin d’améliorer la prise en charge conforme aux objectifs du patient. Cette étude qualitative, menée en Colombie-Britannique (C.-B.), au Canada, examine le point de vue des professionnels de santé sur les implications éthiques de l’utilisation des APM basés sur l’IA dans les soins de fin de vie. Cet article examine comment les APM soulèvent des questions éthiques familières mais aussi nouvelles, à plusieurs niveaux, concernant l’utilisation de l’analyse prédictive en médecine clinique. Ces préoccupations et considérations éthiques s’étendent sur quatre niveaux : individuel, professionnel, organisationnel et sociétal. Notre analyse de ces niveaux interconnectés révèle trois enseignements clés qui se recoupent : 1) la nécessité de redéfinir les rôles des cliniciens dans un paysage techno-thérapeutique en mutation; 2) le défi de gérer l’espoir en fin de vie dans le contexte de l’émergence d’outils prédictifs; et 3) l’importance de favoriser une approche équilibrée et holistique des soins de fin de vie face aux progrès rapides de l’intelligence artificielle. En mettant en lumière la complexité des implications éthiques de l’utilisation des APM dans le contexte sensible et vulnérable des dernières étapes de la vie d’une personne, ce travail fournit un cadre à plusieurs niveaux pouvant éclairer les meilleures pratiques. Il souligne également une vision globale des soins et insiste sur la nécessité de disposer de cadres éthiques, de lignes directrices, d’une collaboration interdisciplinaire et de formations pour guider la conception et la mise en œuvre des APM dans les soins de fin de vie.
Références
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.
Téléchargements
Publié
Comment citer
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
© Jad Brake, Kelly Newton-Mari, Alice Virani, Anita Ho 2026
Cette œuvre est sous licence Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International.
La Revue canadienne de bioéthique applique la Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License à toutes ses publications. Les auteurs conserveront leur droit d'auteur sur leur publication et ils pourront, par exemple, réutiliser leur publication, mettre un lien sur leur page d'accueil ou site web institutionnel, ou déposer un fichier PDF dans un dépôt public. Toutefois, les auteurs permettent à quiconque de télécharger, réutiliser, réimprimer, distribuer, ou copier leur publication, tant que les auteurs originaux et les sources sont cités.
_smaller.png){kind=logo}
