The availability of data is a condition for the development of AI. This is no different in the context of healthcare-related AI applications. Healthcare data are required in the research, development, and follow-up phases of AI. In fact, data collection is also necessary to establish evidence of compliance with legislation. Several legislative instruments, such as the Medical Devices Regulation and the AI Act, enacted data collection obligations to establish (evidence of) the safety of medical therapies, devices, and procedures. Increasingly, such health-related data are collected in the real world from individual data subjects. The relevant legal instruments therefore explicitly mention they shall be without prejudice to other legal acts, including the GDPR. Following an introduction to real-world data, evidence, and electronic health records, this chapter considers the use of AI for healthcare from the perspective of healthcare data. It discusses the role of data custodians, especially when confronted with a request to share healthcare data, as well as the impact of concepts such as data ownership, patient autonomy, informed consent, and privacy and data protection-enhancing techniques.

This chapter covers the common ethical and legal issues that arise in psychiatry. It begins with an overview of the four ethical principles guiding medical practice: autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. A brief discussion of parens patriae and police power follow, highlighting their particular applications in psychiatry. The chapter then goes on to illustrate how the balancing of these principles guides everyday ethical and legal issues. Confidentiality and its exceptions in the interests of safety and prevention of abuse/neglect are covered in detail. Next, informed consent and decision-making are explored. The requirements for informed consent are reviewed, leading into a discussion of those instances when an individual lacks capacity for informed consent (surrogate decision-making, involuntary admission and treatment, and exceptions). Finally, the chapter closes with an examination of the prohibitions against dual relationships, including sexual relationships, with patients.

The scientific community fundamentally requires the conduct of research to meet ethical standards. Bureaucracy and regulation may enforce these requirements, but they ultimately reflect the underlying values of science and the social norms that translate these values into practice. In creating knowledge, scientists must protect research participants, and they are also obliged to treat their data and communications in accordance with honesty, transparency, and a commitment to the benefit of society. We review the history and current state of human participant protection; make a case that many of the changes in standards of data handling and publication reporting over the past ten years themselves have ethical dimensions; and briefly list a number of pending ethics issues in research and publishing that do not as yet have a clear, consensual resolution in the field of psychology.

This chapter provides an overview of methods for data collection in Conversation Analysis and practical advice on collecting interactional data. We touch on several recurrent issues that researchers encounter in the process. These issues include accessing data; the use of existing data (including user-uploaded, like YouTube); navigating gatekeepers in accessing a setting; building trust with members of a setting; building ethnographic understanding of activities under examination; obtaining ethical approvals; protecting privacy of participants; methods and materials for informed consent (including with populations with diminished capacities); devising a recording schedule; deciding when/how often to record; selecting the right quantity and type of recording equipment; considerations of spatial and audio environments; the use of alternative technologies for recording; recording mediated interactions; procedures and check-lists for before recording; positioning and framing the camera; when to press record and when to press stop; navigating the presence of the researcher-recorder on site; and gathering supplementary documentation from the setting.

Discussing treatment options is more complex than giving information and making a recommendation. Today, shared decision making includes patient access to the electronic medical record and internet searches, however patients still turn to their clinicians as the most important and trusted source. In addition to balancing information and emotion, clinicians need to take into account how involved patients wish to be in decision making. A roadmap for discussing treatment decisions is: 1. Prepare for the visit, 2. Frame the decision to be made, 3. Ask about decision-making preferences explicitly, 4. Adapt the discussion and recommendations based on patient decision-making preferences (shared decision making, clinician-led decision making, pros/cons), 5. Check for patient understanding, 6. Establish how the patient wants to proceed with the decision-making process. Take care with how statistics are presented and consider providing decision aides. Asking patients how they want to make decisions will help ground decisions in their values.

The law presumes that all persons are capable of guiding their own day-to-day lives, but the presence of various types and degrees of mental disability or mental incapacity can call this capability into question. When competency is convincingly demonstrated to be impaired, to the extent that decision-making requires input, persistent guidance, or outright control by some external entity, the civil courts might elect at that juncture to impose some form of “substituted judgment.” Substituted judgment undertakes to address three broad and potentially overlapping decision-making domains, described here with brief accompanying examples: prior judgment (regarding wills and other advance directives), present judgment (regarding informed consent and the corresponding right to refuse treatment), and future judgment (regarding guardianship and conservatorship). This chapter will explore each of these domains in detail, identifying the contributions mental health professionals can make to reliable and valid forensic assessment in this regard.

After gathering important information during the assessment process, clinicians can begin working with their patients to collaboratively develop a conceptualization of the patient’s disorder. This early phase of treatment provides an opportunity for clinicians to educate patients about their disorders, including the complex nature of comorbid OCD and EDs, and obtain informed consent for treatment. Informed consent is essential as it ensures that patients understand the treatment options, their potential risks and benefits, and the uncertainty surrounding the best course of treatment for this comorbidity. A functional analysis, which assesses the purpose and function of the patient’s behaviors, can provide valuable data for creating a treatment plan. By understanding the root and function of the patient’s behaviors, it will be possible to prioritize treatment and develop a promising treatment plan. Additionally, it is crucial for clinicians to assess the impact of malnutrition or weight loss on the patient, as this will inform treatment planning and may affect the course of treatment.