跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

论文库

检索计算机领域论文,按研究方向、作者或关键词筛选。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+0新增论文
+0其中 AI 相关
+2已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-15 04:40 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-14 15:09各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-14 04:50 — 2026-11-15 04:50(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-15 04:40最近发现新增版本:2026-11-14 15:09库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-13 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

23,348 已收录论文19,580 AI 相关6,729 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-15 04:38(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.14989

"It's still 100% on me": Designing AI Tools for the Intersection of Physicians' Care and Legal Infrastructures

Gennie Mansi, Julia Kim, Lynn Dombrowski, Mark Riedl, Naveena Karusala

原文摘要

Laws and regulations deeply shape physicians' workflows and impact how they incorporate AI-based decision support tools to care for patients. Despite calls to comply with legal standards, many AI-based decision support tools have not transitioned well to clinical settings. The medical community remains concerned about their legal liability, risks to patients, and limited clinical value of such tools. To better understand how to address these concerns in the design of AI tools for clinical decision-making, we conducted 19 interviews with physicians in the U.S. We used scenario-based design to investigate physicians' legal concerns in the context of an AI-based drug recommendation tool. Drawing on the ethics of care, we surface connections between physicians' care and the healthcare laws and regulations that deeply shape their information needs. We describe how physicians wanted to use the tool in individual and collective practices to care for themselves, their patients, their colleagues, work institution, and even the broader medical profession. We discuss how the design of AI-based decision support tools can present legal ambiguities that would prevent their caring actions and lead to non-use of the AI tool. Through our work, we contribute to responsible AI development in healthcare. Our analysis illuminates why and how certain kinds of information reduce legal ambiguity and support physicians' care when using AI-based decision support tools. We contribute an understanding of how to help physicians navigate legal liability and draw implications for grounding AI tools' designs in their care.

cs.HC