Transparency of AI in Healthcare as a Multilayered System of Accountabilities: Between Legal Requirements and Technical Limitations.

The lack of transparency is one of the artificial intelligence (AI)'s fundamental challenges, but the concept of transparency might be even more opaque than AI itself. Researchers in different fields who attempt to provide the solutions to improve AI's transparency articulate different but neighboring concepts that include, besides transparency, explainability and interpretability. Yet, there is no common taxonomy neither within one field (such as data science) nor between different fields (law and data science). In certain areas like healthcare, the requirements of transparency are crucial since the decisions directly affect people's lives. In this paper, we suggest an interdisciplinary vision on how to tackle the issue of AI's transparency in healthcare, and we propose a single point of reference for both legal scholars and data scientists on transparency and related concepts. Based on the analysis of the European Union (EU) legislation and literature in computer science, we submit that transparency shall be considered the "way of thinking" and umbrella concept characterizing the process of AI's development and use. Transparency shall be achieved through a set of measures such as interpretability and explainability, communication, auditability, traceability, information provision, record-keeping, data governance and management, and documentation. This approach to deal with transparency is of general nature, but transparency measures shall be always contextualized. By analyzing transparency in the healthcare context, we submit that it shall be viewed as a system of accountabilities of involved subjects (AI developers, healthcare professionals, and patients) distributed at different layers (insider, internal, and external layers, respectively). The transparency-related accountabilities shall be built-in into the existing accountability picture which justifies the need to investigate the relevant legal frameworks. These frameworks correspond to different layers of the transparency system. The requirement of informed medical consent correlates to the external layer of transparency and the Medical Devices Framework is relevant to the insider and internal layers. We investigate the said frameworks to inform AI developers on what is already expected from them with regards to transparency. We also discover the gaps in the existing legislative frameworks concerning AI's transparency in healthcare and suggest the solutions to fill them in.

The data protection and medical device frameworks - obstacles to the deployment of mHealth across Europe?

This article examines the receptivity of the current EU legal regime towards innovative mHealth technologies and their deployment on a pan-European basis. At present, a coherent legal strategy towards the development of mHealth technologies does not exist. The deployment of such technologies is influenced in an uncoordinated way by various disparate European legislative initiatives. This article focuses on problems that may be encountered by mHealth platforms through application of the Medical Device and Data Protection Frameworks. Theses frameworks are analysed in this article through the lens of a pan-European deployment of mHealth technologies. The aim throughout is to look for potential problems for the deployment of such technologies posed by these frameworks and, where possible, to suggest improvements.

Mobility should be fun. A consumer (law) perspective on border check technology.

After 9/11, states looked at transportation as if it was a matter of paying taxes: "We cannot make it fun, but we can make it efficient." When traveling, we are asked to pass on data, give body samples, and pass through body scanners in the name of the general interest and in the name of our safety. Technology complements existing human checks and controls. Here we take a fresh look at the new security apparatuses and make transportation of humans more passenger-centered. Consumer protection law might help to complement the existing use of data protection law principles by citizen organizations. It should be possible to satisfy consumer needs, without forgetting the perspective of the citizen.