Hamostaseologie 2024; 44(06): 422-424
DOI: 10.1055/a-2443-4130

Michael Nagler

1   Department of Clinical Chemistry, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland

› Author Affiliations
Funding Michael Nagler is supported by a research grant of the Swiss National Science Foundation (215574). › Further InformationAlso available at   Permissions and Reprints

In spite of my personal belief in the benefits of artificial intelligence (AI), reading Cathy O'Neil's book “Weapons of Math Destruction” left me feeling unsettled.[1] She describes how flawed and unchecked algorithms are widely applied in areas that affect us all: hiring, credit scoring, access to education, and insurance pricing. In one example, a fixed percentage of teachers in a U.S. region was dismissed every year based on biased and opaque algorithms. The authors concluded that such algorithms act as “weapons of math destruction,” perpetuate and amplify societal biases, act unethically, and harm vulnerable populations. The question arises as to what happens when we apply these algorithms to medicine? How do we know whether we are giving our patients the correct diagnosis or prognosis? Are we still sure that patients are receiving the appropriate treatment? Would we notice if the algorithms were geared more toward the needs of companies (make a lot of money) or health insurance companies (spend as little as possible)? In fact, evidence of bias and inequality of algorithms in medicine is already available.[2] Due to these risks, some of my colleagues suggest that AI should be completely banned from medicine.

Publication History

Received: 15 October 2024

Accepted: 15 October 2024

Article published online:
10 December 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

  References 1 O'Neil C. Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy. First ed.. New York, NY: Crown; 2016 2 Obermeyer Z, Powers B, Vogeli C, Mullainathan S. Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations. Science 2019; 366 (6464) 447-453 3 Nilius H, Tsouka S, Nagler M, Masoodi M. Machine learning applications in precision medicine: overcoming challenges and unlocking potential. Trends Analyt Chem 2024; 179: 117872 4 Cirillo D, Valencia A. Big data analytics for personalized medicine. Curr Opin Biotechnol 2019; 58: 161-167 5 Nagler M, Nilius H, Michielin G, Masoodi M, Largiadèr CR. New diagnostic technologies in laboratory medicine: potential benefits and challenges. Pol Arch Intern Med 2024; 134 (7–8): 16772 6 Ayers JW, Poliak A, Dredze M. et al. Comparing physician and artificial intelligence chatbot responses to patient questions posted to a public social media forum. JAMA Intern Med 2023; 183 (06) 589-596 7 Friberg L, Rosenqvist M, Lip GYH. Evaluation of risk stratification schemes for ischaemic stroke and bleeding in 182 678 patients with atrial fibrillation: the Swedish Atrial Fibrillation cohort study. Eur Heart J 2012; 33 (12) 1500-1510 8 McDuff D, Barakat A, Winbush A. et al. The Google health digital well-being study: protocol for a digital device use and well-being study. JMIR Res Protoc 2024; 13: e49189 9 Chrysafi Lam, Carton Patell. From Code to Clots: Applying Machine Learning to Clinical Aspects of Venous Thromboembolism – Prevention, Diagnosis and Management. Hamostaseologie 2024; 44: 429-445 10 Kahl F, Kapsecker M, Nisse L. et al. Digital Technologies in Hereditary Coagulation Disorders: A Systematic Review. Hamostaseologie 2024; 44: 446-458 11 Nilius Nagler. Machine-Learning Applications in Thrombosis and Hemostasis. Hamostaseologie 2024; 44: 459-465 12 Pospelov GS. Artificial intelligence as a basis for a new information technology. IFAC Proc Vol 1983; 16 (20) 1-14 13 Information Technology History - Outline. Published August 5, 2012. Accessed October 15, 2024 at: https://web.archive.org/web/20120805042711/http://www.tcf.ua.edu/AZ/ITHistoryOutline.htm