Invisible prescribers: the risks of Google’s AI summaries

Journal of Medical Ethics | Jme Forum (2025)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

With digital technologies, your patients have a ‘doctor in their pocket’. But something new is happening when they search online for medical advice. Typing a question such as “Can I take ibuprofen with blood pressure tablets?” or “What helps against chest pain?” into Google no longer produces the familiar list of links. Instead, a confident, AI-generated box appears at the top of the page, offering what looks like an authoritative answer. Google calls this feature an AI Overview. Microsoft’s Copilot provides similar AI-generated summaries through its Edge browser. These systems mark a shift in how people find and interpret health information online. By design, these summaries reduce click-through rates to real websites by 40–60%, replacing the process of browsing diverse sources with a single, seemingly definitive response. First launched in the United States in 2024, where it drew criticism for misleading health advice, AI Overviews are now expanding across Europe. AI Overviews are not just another way of “Googling symptoms.” Until recently, users were presented with a variety of sources: public health agencies, hospital websites, patient forums, news outlets, and wellness blogs. Although the quality of these sources varied, the diversity itself enabled patients to cross-check information, prepare questions, and participate more actively in their care. Searching online can empower patients when they have access to multiple perspectives, allowing them to assess information critically. With AI Overviews, that step disappears.

Author's Profile

Hannah van Kolfschooten
University of Amsterdam

Analytics

Added to PP
2025-11-12

Downloads
145 (#115,424)

6 months
145 (#69,006)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?