Skip to content
EvidenceHelixEvidenceLib · Scientific Encyclopedia
⌘ K

Scientific library

EvidenceLib encyclopediaAll articles A–Z2,835
Books209
All textbooksMedical textbooksHuman anatomyOrganisms & biodiversityOther sciences
Open-access articles1,406Cancer study catalog458How it is made

My workspace this browser

Saved pages0Notes & annotations0

Recently viewed

Explore by field

Cancer and Oncology182Genetics and Genomics170Neuroscience185Cardiovascular Medicine180Immunology142Pharmacology173Molecular Biology161Infectious Diseases150Rare and Inherited Diseases181Clinical Research173Anatomy and Physiology613Drugs and Chemicals621Psychiatry and Psychology185Public Health and Nutrition178Diagnostics and Medical Technology125Respiratory Medicine113Digestive System and Liver91Metabolism and Endocrine Disease177Bones, Joints, Muscles and Skin213Kidney, Urology and Women's Health173Eye, Ear, Nose and Throat55
Plans & pricingCompare EvidenceHelix workspace plans
Library›Open textbooks›Ethical implications of the use of AI-based technologies for medical image classification systems in screening: a qualitative systematic review›Assessment of factors relevant to the NHS and other parties

Continue where you left off ()

GO BEYOND THE PAGEReading is just the beginning.

Turn scientific reading into research. Compare studies, examine evidence, and organize your findings in EvidenceHelix Workspace.

Explore Research Workspace →

Ethical implications of the use of AI-based technologies for medical image classification systems in screening: a qualitative systematic review · Assessment of factors relevant to the NHS and other parties

Assessment of factors relevant to the NHS and other parties

CC BY 4.0 · National Institute for Health and Care Research · approximately 1 min read

This review highlights several critical issues that should be considered by policy-makers, the NHS and developers to ensure the responsible integration of AI in medical screening.

For the NHS, key factors include the need for:

  • Equity of access: ensuring AI deployment does not widen inequalities across regions or resource-limited hospitals.
  • Workforce implications: addressing how AI may alter the roles of radiologists, ophthalmologists and other specialties, and planning for training and professional development.
  • Regulatory and governance frameworks: putting in place robust oversight to address liability, accountability and standards of clinical safety.

For policy-makers, important considerations are:

  • Public trust and acceptability: developing clear communication with patients and the public about the role and limitations of AI in screening.
  • Data governance: ensuring compliance with national and international standards on privacy, consent and security.

For developers, priorities include:

  • Transparency: designing AI systems that are explainable and able to be independently reviewed in real-world NHS contexts.
  • Adaptability: ensuring that systems are validated across diverse populations and screening pathways to mitigate bias.

Overall, the ethical considerations identified in this review suggest that careful co-ordination between the NHS, regulators and policy-makers and developers is required to ensure that AI is implemented in a way that supports equity, transparency and patient safety.

The ethical consideration that may be disease-specific and the long-term ethical implications of the use of AI should be evaluated in future research.

← Assessment of clinical effectivenessDiscussion →

Attribution. Melina Vasileiou; Victoria Wakefield; Clare Dadswell; Steven J Edwards (2026). Ethical implications of the use of AI-based technologies for medical image classification systems in screening: a qualitative systematic review. National Institute for Health and Care Research. Copyright © 2026 Vasileiou et al. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. NCBI Bookshelf NBK623491. CC BY 4.0. Original source ↗. Text reproduced from the Bookshelf XML without changing wording; figures, images and supplements are not reproduced.

In this chapter Contents

  • Assessment of factors relevant to the NHS and other parties

Source

OpenStax source file ↗

Source record ↗

EvidenceLib is a research-education resource, not medical advice. It does not diagnose, prescribe or recommend starting, stopping or changing any treatment. Talk to a qualified clinician about your own situation. Methods, sources and licences · Rights and removal requests · Legal · Support