aceBeyond Autonomy: Ethical Considerations of AI in Substitute Decision-Making for Incapacitated Patients
The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into healthcare offers significant potential for enhancing patient care, particularly for incapacitated patients unable to communicate their preferences. Advanced AI systems, such as Personalized Patient Preference Predictors (P4), are increasingly proposed as tools to assist in substitute decision-making, yet their ethical implications remain underexamined. This paper critically examines the ethical implications of employing AI-driven preference prediction systems…
Personalized Patient Preference Predictors may infer probabilities but cannot capture the relational, contextual and value-laden nature of real patient preferences, leaving risks of algorithmic paternalism and latent bias.
The work is a conceptual ethical analysis based on principled reasoning, and the supplied text reports no empirical testing of P4 systems in clinical practice, so real-world performance is unmeasured.
Evidence
- Peer-reviewedJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice2026-10-01
How should this claim be treated?
Truvace Impact Record TRV-2026-1403, v1: “Beyond Autonomy: Ethical Considerations of AI in Substitute Decision-Making for Incapacitated Patients.” Truvace, 2026-10-15. /record/TRV-2026-1403 (accessed at citation time). sha256 1c3b6b7e74afa5f0…
Calibration history
Every change to this record since certification, in the open. None yet — the reading has held since it entered the record.
Certified into the record
How to verify without trusting this page
Fetch the canonical text of any version from /api/record/TRV-2026-1403 and hash it yourself — for example shasum -a 256 on the saved canonical field. The result must equal content_hash, and each version’s text ends with prev:followed by the prior version’s hash (version 1 chains to 64 zeros). If a single character of any version had been altered since certification, the chain would not reproduce.