Artificial intelligence in medicine may reshape trust, autonomy and care

The growing role of artificial intelligence in healthcare may reshape one of medicine’s most fundamental relationships: the bond between doctors and patients. A new study warns that while AI promises faster diagnoses, personalized therapies, and streamlined workflows, it could also undermine trust, erode professional autonomy, and compromise confidentiality if ethical safeguards are neglected.

The research, titled “How Could Artificial Intelligence Change the Doctor–Patient Relationship? A Medical Ethics Perspective” and published in Healthcare, explores the ethical dilemmas that emerge as AI tools become embedded in clinical practice.

Can AI improve care without undermining medical judgment?

The authors review how AI has already entered multiple specialties, from radiology and dermatology to cardiology and oncology. Algorithms are increasingly able to process large datasets, spot patterns invisible to the human eye, and suggest diagnostic or therapeutic options. Such capabilities could reduce human error, expand access to specialized care, and enable earlier interventions.

Yet the study raises a cautionary note. Physicians risk ceding too much authority to systems they do not fully understand. Many AI tools function as “black boxes,” generating recommendations without transparent reasoning. This opacity limits doctors’ ability to verify outputs, weakening their professional autonomy. Over time, there is a risk of de-skilling as doctors grow dependent on automated systems rather than their own clinical judgment.

The research suggests that the promise of improved efficiency must be weighed against the possibility that AI could transform doctors into passive overseers of machine-led decisions. For the doctor–patient relationship, this shift threatens to redefine the core role of the physician—from trusted guide to algorithm interpreter.

What happens to trust and consent in an AI-mediated system?

The study states that informed consent is at risk in the age of AI. Patients are rarely told when artificial intelligence is used in their care, and when disclosure occurs, the explanations often lack clarity. For trust to remain intact, physicians must be transparent about how AI contributes to medical decisions, including its capabilities, limitations, and potential biases.

The authors argue that consent should not be a procedural formality but an informed dialogue. Patients must be empowered to understand whether their diagnosis or treatment has been influenced by an algorithm, how reliable the system is, and what risks of error exist. Without such transparency, the ethical foundation of modern medicine, patient autonomy, may erode.

The communication gap also extends to the broader public. As AI becomes normalized in clinical settings, there is a danger that patients may assume recommendations are entirely human-driven. This misunderstanding could lead to misplaced trust in both physicians and technology. The study underscores that disclosure, explainability, and shared decision-making are essential if AI is to enhance rather than diminish the therapeutic alliance.

How can confidentiality and the human bond be protected?

Confidentiality remains one of the most pressing concerns. AI systems require vast datasets to function effectively, often including sensitive health information. Expanding access to these records for training or application raises the risks of misuse, unauthorized sharing, and security breaches. For patients, any breach of confidentiality damages trust not only in the healthcare system but also in the individual physician.

The authors caution that as more actors, including private corporations, gain access to health data for AI development, safeguarding confidentiality becomes more complex. The traditional bond of trust between patient and doctor, anchored in discretion, may be tested by the involvement of third-party systems.

At the same time, AI carries both promise and peril for the human bond in healthcare. On one hand, by automating administrative and routine tasks, technology could free doctors to spend more time engaging with patients, listening to their concerns, and providing empathetic care. On the other, an overreliance on automated decision-making could reduce the physician’s role to delivering machine-generated outcomes, depersonalizing care and weakening the emotional connection that forms the cornerstone of healing.

The study highlights a delicate balance. If AI remains a supportive tool that enhances rather than replaces human judgment, it could strengthen the doctor–patient relationship. If it becomes a substitute for empathy and clinical reasoning, it risks eroding the very essence of medical professionalism.