Bill of Health
JUNE 13, 2022
As medical care advanced — and categories like “ brain death ” emerged — doctors found themselves facing challenging new dilemmas and old ones more often. The AAMC requires medical school graduates to “demonstrate a commitment to ethical principles pertaining to provision or withholding of care, confidentiality, informed consent.”
Bill of Health
APRIL 18, 2023
The enormous ‘data hunger’ of medical AI may also affect medical privacy, and the opaque nature of many AI applications may put existing health practices and other patients’ rights under pressure, such as the provision of information, informed consent, and legal redress.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Bill of Health
MARCH 9, 2022
This is presented as a dilemma for clinicians who must weigh both possibilities equally; however, neither assertion has been adequately investigated in the P-AT literature, and the notion of “enhanced capacity” in altered states is neither supported by evidence nor by legal definitions of consent. Risk Mitigation. McLane et al.
Healthcare IT Today
DECEMBER 22, 2023
While it sounds reasonable, the definition of “responsible use” is not provided. A key component placing providers at risk is the lack of informed consent by patients to use these models to drive their care. A human touch is necessary to facilitate the appropriate and informed use of AI in the context of each individual patient.
Drug & Device Law
AUGUST 8, 2022
Apparently, a fraudulent foreign-trained “doctor” treated the plaintiffs, none of whom claimed malpractice or any physical injury whatsoever. Anyway, this fraudulent “doctor” allegedly “touched them without informed consent” and caused them “emotional distress. 23 in its current form. at *3) Rule 23(c)(4) partial class.
Drug & Device Law
MARCH 9, 2022
The plaintiff expert intended to opine that the defendant’s premarket testing was inadequate, that the mesh device labeling inadequately informed doctors, that the labeling precluded patient informed consent, and that the inadequate labeling meant that the mesh device was “misbranded” and “adulterated.”
Drug & Device Law
SEPTEMBER 9, 2022
Two cases are cited in connection with the court’s definition of a novel test for proximate cause for a prescription medical device warnings claim. Larkin did not discuss the standard for proximate causation or suggest, as Thacker implies, that informed consent is part of the inquiry. It focused squarely on the doctor.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
342 
Let's personalize your content