UDC: 101.1:316.4:61:004.8
https://doi.org/10.25198/2077-7175-2026-4-120


viewing

FROM THE E-PATIENT TO THE AI-PATIENT: THE TRANSFORMATION OF SUBJECTIVITY IN THE AGE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Yu. A. Kuzovenkova1, L. G. Ilivitskaya2
Samara State Medical University, Samara, Russia
1 e-mail: yu.a.kuzovenkova@samsmu.ru
2 e-mail: l.g.ilivitskaya@samsmu.ru

Abstract. The expansion of artificial intelligence in medicine changes not only access to information, but also forms of interaction between doctor and patient, and with them patient subjectivity itself. The relevance of this study lies in the need to conceptualize these changes. The theoretical foundation of the article is T. Ferguson’s concept of the e-patient, which identifies four characteristics of the patient: equipped (information-equipped), enabled (capable of action), empowered (autonomous), and engaged (involved in communities and interaction). The aim of the article is to describe the transformation of the four characteristics of the e-patient and, on this basis, to propose the concept of the «AI-patient» as an analytical model of new forms of medical behavior associated with the spread of artificial intelligence. The methodological basis consists of conceptual and comparative analysis, as well as interpretation of materials related to the development of digital medicine; the theoretical framework includes the e-patient concept, M. Foucault’s ideas on the relationship between knowledge and power, B. Latour’s actor-network theory, and J.-L. Nancy’s philosophy of togetherness. It is shown that at the level of equipped the nature of knowledge changes: if the e-patient independently searched for and organized information, the AI-patient receives it in ready-made form, without a visible process of its production. Enabled is transformed through a shift in competencies from working with internet sources to the skills of formulating prompts, evaluating answers, and interacting with interfaces. At the level of empowered, the structure of autonomy changes: the patient gains additional tools for independence from the doctor, but this independence is partly grounded in the algorithm. Finally, engaged shifts from horizontal networks of mutual support to a private dialogue with the interface, which weakens collective forms of patient solidarity. All these changes lead to the formation of a hybrid patient subjectivity. The article’s scientific novelty lies in substantiating the concept of the «AI patient» as a new figure of medical subjectivity emerging from the restructuring of relations of knowledge, power, autonomy, and sociality in the context of AI use. The theoretical and practical significance of the study lies in the fact that the proposed model makes it possible to describe, in a new way, the transformation of doctor – patient – technology relations and to identify directions for further research into the social and ethical consequences of digital medicine.

Key words: patient, e-patient, AI-patient, artificial intelligence, doctor, medicine, patient subjectivity.

Cite as: Kuzovenkova, Yu. A., Ilivitskaya, L. G. (2026) [From the E-Patient to the AI-Patient: the transformation of subjectivity in the age of artificial intelligence]. Intellekt. Innovacii. Investicii [Intellect. Innovations. Investments]. Vol. 4, pp. 120–131. – https://doi.org/10.25198/2077-7175-2026-4-120.


References

  1. Vvedenskaya, E. V. (2024) [Digital Agents in Medicine: New Opportunities and Challenges]. Ehticheskaya mysl’ [Ethical Thought]. Vol. 24. No. 1, pp. 115–128. – https://doi.org/10.21146/2074-4870-2024-24-1-115-128. (In Russ.).
  2. Ivanova, A. A. (2023) [Traditional and New Forms of Patient Expertise: Together with Doctors or versus Them?]. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo un-ta. Sociologiya [Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. Sociology]. Vol. 16. No. 4, pp. 458–474. – https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu12.2023.407. (In Russ.).
  3. Latour, B. (2014) Peresborka sotsial’nogo: vvedeniye v aktorno-setevuyu teoriyu [Reassembling the Social: Introduction to Actor-Network Theory]. Moscow: HSE, 384 p.
  4. Nancy, J.-L. (2004) Bytiye yedinichnoye mnozhestvennoye [Being Singular Plural]. Minsk: I. Logvinov, 272 p.
  5. Amlaev, K. R., et al. (2024) [The application of artificial intellect in health care: prospects and challenges for science and clinical medicine]. Problemi socialnoi gigieni, zdravookhranenia i istorii meditsini [Рroblems of social hygiene, public health and the history of medicine]. Vol. 32. No. 3, pp. 331–338. – http://dx.doi.org/10.32687/0869-866X-2024-32-3-331338. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).
  6. Foucault, M. (2026) Istoriya seksual’nosti [History of Sexuality]. Vol. 1. The Will to Knowledge. M.: Ad Marginem, 136 p.
  7. Ayers, J. W., et al. (2023) Comparing Physician and Artificial Intelligence Chatbot Responses to Patient Questions Posted to a Public Social Media Forum. JAMA Internal Medicine. Vol. 183. No. 6, pp. 589–596. – https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2023.1838. (In Eng.).
  8. Bean, A. M., et al. (2026) Reliability of LLMs as medical assistants for the general public: a randomized preregistered study. Nature Medicine. Vol. 32, pp. 609–615. – https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-025-04074-y. (In Eng.).
  9. Ferguson, T. (2000) Online patient-helpers and physicians working together: a new partnership for high quality health care. British medical journal. Vol. 321. No. 7269, pp. 1129–1132. – https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.321.7269.1129. (In Eng.).
  10. Ferguson, T. е-Patients Scholars Working Group (2007) Fox S. e-Patients: How they can help us heal healthcare, 104 p. (In Eng.).
  11. Ferguson, T., Frydman, G. (2004) The first generation of e-patients. British medical journal. Vol. 328, p. 1148. – https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.328.7449.1148. (In Eng.).
  12. Hardey, M. (2001) ‘E-health’: The internet and the transformation of patients into consumers and producers of health knowledge. Information, Communication & Society. Vol. 4. No. 3, pp. 388–405. – https://doi.org/10.1080/713768551. (In Eng.).
  13. Masters, K. (2016) The e-patient and medical students. Medical Teacher. Vol. 38. No. 3, pp. 314–316. – https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2015.1112896. (In Eng).
  14. Mechanic, D. (1996) Changing Medical Organization and the Erosion of Trust. The Milbank Quarterly. Vol. 74. No. 2, pp. 171–189. – https://doi.org/10.2307/3350245. (In Eng.).
  15. Mou, Yu., Xu, T., Hu, Ya (2023) Uniqueness neglect on consumer resistance to AI. Marketing Intelligence & Planning. Vol. 41. No. 6, pp. 669–689. – https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-11-2022-0505. (In Eng.).
  16. Moy, S., et al. (2024) Patient Perspectives on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care: A Scoping Review. Journal of patient-centered research and reviews. Vol. 11. No. 1, pp. 51–62. – https://doi.org/10.17294/2330-0698.2029. (In Eng.).
  17. Omar, M., et al. (2026) Mapping the susceptibility of large language models to medical misinformation across clinical notes and social media: a cross-sectional benchmarking analysis. The Lancet Digit Health. Vol. 8. No. 1, p. 100949. – https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landig.2025.100949. (In Eng.).
  18. Parsons, T. (1991). The social system. London: Routledge. Taylor and Frances Group, 575 р. (In Eng.).
  19. Pasquale, F. (2020) New Laws of Robotics. Defending Human Expertise in the Age of AI. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts & London, England, 352 p. (In Eng.).
  20. Saikia, M. J., Borthakur, D. (2025) Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Patient–Healthcare Relationships: Psychosocial Perspective. IEEE Access. Vol. 13, pp. 164682–164701. – https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3611818. (In Eng.).
  21. Sands, D. Z., Finn, N. B. (2025) From Internet to Artificial Intelligence (Al) Bots: Symbiotic Evolutions of Digital Technologies and e-Patients. Journal of participatory medicine. Vol. 17, p. e68911. – https://doi.org/10.2196/68911. (In Eng.).
  22. Shekar, Sh., et al. (2025) People Overtrust AI-Generated Medical Advice despite Low Accuracy. NEJM AI. Vol. 2. No. 6. – https://doi.org/10.1056/AIoa2300015. (In Eng.).
  23. Topol, E. J. (2019) High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nature Medicine. Vol. 25. No. 1, pp. 44–56. – https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-018-0300-7. (In Eng.).
  24. Woods, S. S., et al. (2025) From E-Patients to AI Patients: The Tidal Wave Empowering Patients, Redefining Clinical Relationships, and Transforming Care. Journal of participatory medicine. Vol. 17, p. e75794. –https://doi.org/10.2196/75794. (In Eng.).

In order for us to provide you with high-quality services, we use cookies that are stored on your computer (location information; ip-address; type, language, OS and browser version; device type and screen resolution; source from which you came to site the user; what pages the user opens and what buttons the user clicks; the same information is used to process statistical data on the use of the site through the Yandex.Metrika Internet service). By clicking the "I agree" button, you confirm that you are informed about the use of cookies on our website. You can disable cookies in your browser settings.