Record STMT-WB85100Aspirational

Code of Ethics: A Transoral Robotic Surgery Case Study

Code of conduct ProfessionalGlobaladopted

This academic paper proposes a new five-principle code of ethics for robotics, integrating perspectives from engineering, medicine, computing, and human-robot interaction. It examines issues such as physical and mental health safety, product transparency, data protection, predictability for accountability, and ethical board approval. The framework is then applied and evaluated through a case study on transoral robotic surgery.

Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.

Who issued it

Yun ZhouAcademic

Lead issuer

Legal forceAspirational

Under whose authorityProfessional

Judged fromfull text

Who it governs

AI developers and providersAI deployers and usersProfessional groupResearchers and academics

Robotics researchers, engineers, and healthcare practitioners should read this to understand and apply ethical principles and risk assessments to robotic systems.

Sectors

Healthcare · transoral robotic surgeryResearch and science · robotics

What the document contains

What's covered

This document covers the development of an interdisciplinary code of ethics for robotics, detailing five core principles regarding safety, transparency, privacy, accountability, and research approval. It also covers a case study demonstrating how these ethical principles apply to medical robotics, specifically transoral robotic surgery.

What's missing

The document does not provide binding legal enforcement mechanisms or statutory penalties for breaches of the code.

Key takeaways

The paper introduces an interdisciplinary code of ethics for robotics combining engineering, medical, computing, and human-robot interaction perspectives.
Five core ethical principles are outlined, focusing on health and safety, product transparency, data protection, behavioral predictability, and ethical board approval.
A concise ethical risk assessment is proposed to allow stakeholders to calibrate robotic values and intervene in time.
The practical application of the proposed code is successfully demonstrated using a transoral robotic surgery case study.

Principles it states

Safeguard health and safety which including both physical and mental health.The product capability is transparent to participants and the public.The human right to data protection and privacy should always take as the primary respect with reasonable design objectives.The robot behaviour should be predictable and re-constructible for the purpose of accountability.Do the study and research with the ethical board approval.

Outline

· 1. Introduction
  - 1.1 Objective
· 2. Literature review
  - 2.1 ENZ Code of Ethical Conduct
  - 2.2 WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects
  - 2.3 ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct
  - 2.4 Ethics issues in the field of HRI
    - 2.4.1 Code of ethics for HRI Profession
· 3. Code of ethics
  - 3.1 Safeguard health and safety which including both physical and mental health.
  - 3.2 The product capability is transparent to participants and the public.
  - 3.3 The human right to data protection and privacy should always take as the primary respect with reasonable design objectives.
  - 3.4 The robot behaviour should be predictable and re-constructible for the purpose of accountability.
  - 3.5 Do the study and research with the ethical board approval
· 4. Case study
  - 4.1 Safeguard health and safety which including both physical and mental health.
  - 4.2 The product capability is transparent to participants and the public.
  - 4.3 The human right to data protection and privacy should always take as the primary respect with reasonable design objectives.
  - 4.4 The robot behaviour should be predictable and re-constructible for the purpose of accountability.
  - 4.5 Do the study and research with the ethical board approval.
· 5. Conclusion and recommendations

Issued2021

Length3,297 words · 7 pages

FormatNot recorded

Scopeglobal

How it scores

Pending review

Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.

Accountability

4/5

Clear responsibility for AI outcomes

4. The robot behaviour should be predictable and re-constructible for the purpose of accountability.

3. Code of ethics

screening score · 2026-10-23

Fairness

2/5

Non-discrimination and equitable treatment

The appearance and behaviours of the robot should be designed to avoid the human frailty such as ableist morphologies, racist, sexist.

3.1. Safeguard health and safety which including both physical and mental health.

screening score · 2026-10-23

Human Dignity

4/5

Respect for the inherent worth of persons

the prime directive that all HRI activities such as development, marketing, and research, should follow the overall principle which respect for human persons that involves autonomy, bodily and mental integrity.

2.4.1. Code of ethics for HRI Profession

screening score · 2026-10-23

Human Oversight

4/5

Humans remain in control of consequential decisions

add a feature with the highest privilege that allow the user to terminate the robot in the case that lost control.

3.1. Safeguard health and safety which including both physical and mental health.

screening score · 2026-10-23

Privacy

4/5

Protection of personal data and private life

3. The human right to data protection and privacy should always take as the primary respect with reasonable design objectives.

3. Code of ethics

screening score · 2026-10-23

Transparency

4/5

Openness about how AI systems work and are used

2. The product capability is transparent to participants and the public.

3. Code of ethics

screening score · 2026-10-23

Enforcement

1/5

Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force

report breach of Code whenever and whatever. It supports us to work honestly with each other and fight against any existence of non-ethical behaviour.

2.1. ENZ Code of Ethical Conduct

screening score · 2026-10-23

Impact Assessment

4/5

Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use

the paper also proposes the idea that there can be a concise ethical risk assessment to apply to any robotic product or service in order for any stakeholders to intervene in time

Abstract

screening score · 2026-10-23

Topics

robotics human_robot_interaction code_of_ethics medical_robotics artificial_intelligence