ArticleJAMA dermatology2021
Lack of Transparency and Potential Bias in Artificial Intelligence Data Sets and Algorithms: A Scoping Review.
Article in JAMA dermatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07765303 (Skin Pigment Type, Phototype and Photodamage Determination Using Image Analyses Powered by Artificial Intelligence - SPAI Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 144 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Skin Pigment Type, Phototype and Photodamage Determination Using Image Analyses Powered by Artificial Intelligence - SPAI Study
Who cites it
144 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The Algorithmic Divide: A Systematic Review on AI-Driven Racial Disparities in Healthcare.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence vs. dermoscopy for malignancy risk stratification of pigmented skin lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis for public health.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Deep Learning Algorithms in the Diagnosis of Basal Cell Carcinoma Using Dermatoscopy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Availability of Evidence for Predictive Machine Learning Algorithms in Primary Care: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2024Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence for the Classification of Pigmented Skin Lesions in Populations with Skin of Color: A Systematic Review.Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Pooled it
- Assessing Algorithmic Fairness With a Multimodal Artificial Intelligence Model in Men of African and Non-African Origin on NRG Oncology Prostate Cancer Phase III Trials.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2025Trial
- Smartphone Applications in Dermatology With Special Focus on AI: A European-Continent-Based Review.International journal of dermatology · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Burn and Wound Care: Image Analysis, Prediction, and Clinical Integration.Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association · 2026Review
- Neuroimmune pharmacotherapy across the skin-brain axis: mechanisms, therapeutic targets, and AI-enabled precision approaches.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Review
- Evolution of Facial Assessment in Aesthetic Medicine: 3D Imaging, Digital Analysis, and Patient-Reported Outcomes.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Review
- Local Deployment of Open-Weight Language Models in Dermatology: Viewpoint on Privacy, Equity, and Practical Implementation.JMIR dermatology · 2026Article
- Article
- A systematic map of generative AI guidelines and reporting in ecology and evolutionary biology: towards the framework of AI disclosure for Improved Transparency (AIdIT).Research integrity and peer review · 2026Review
- Performance of DeepSeek V3.2 and ChatGPT 5.1 in Musculoskeletal Triage and Differential Diagnosis of Outpatients With Low Back Pain: Multidimensional Comparative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Advancing dermatology patients' quality of life through digital health innovations: a comprehensive systematic review.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Strategies for mitigating artificial intelligence bias in healthcare: a systematic review.JAMIA open · 2026Review
- Perspectives on Artificial Intelligence in Dermatology: An International Cross-Sectional Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Artificial superintelligence alignment in healthcare.Japanese journal of radiology · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence for research capacity strengthening: Two reviews and a pathway to shift power in global health.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Robustness of a convolutional neural network trained on dermoscopic images and challenged with close-up images.Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG · 2026Article
84 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
importanceClinical artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms have the potential to improve clinical care, but fair, generalizable algorithms depend on the clinical data on which they are trained and tested.
objectiveTo assess whether data sets used for training diagnostic AI algorithms addressing skin disease are adequately described and to identify potential sources of bias in these data sets. DATA SOURCES: In this scoping review, PubMed was used to search for peer-reviewed research articles published between January 1, 2015, and November 1, 2020, with the following paired search terms: deep learning and dermatology, artificial intelligence and dermatology, deep learning and dermatologist, and artificial intelligence and dermatologist. STUDY SELECTION: Studies that developed or tested an existing deep learning algorithm for triage, diagnosis, or monitoring using clinical or dermoscopic images of skin disease were selected, and the articles were independently reviewed by 2 investigators to verify that they met selection criteria. CONSENSUS PROCESS: Data set audit criteria were determined by consensus of all authors after reviewing existing literature to highlight data set transparency and sources of bias.
resultsA total of 70 unique studies were included. Among these studies, 1 065 291 images were used to develop or test AI algorithms, of which only 257 372 (24.2%) were publicly available. Only 14 studies (20.0%) included descriptions of patient ethnicity or race in at least 1 data set used. Only 7 studies (10.0%) included any information about skin tone in at least 1 data set used. Thirty-six of the 56 studies developing new AI algorithms for cutaneous malignant neoplasms (64.3%) met the gold standard criteria for disease labeling. Public data sets were cited more often than private data sets, suggesting that public data sets contribute more to new development and benchmarks. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This scoping review identified 3 issues in data sets that are used to develop and test clinical AI algorithms for skin disease that should be addressed before clinical translation: (1) sparsity of data set characterization and lack of transparency, (2) nonstandard and unverified disease labels, and (3) inability to fully assess patient diversity used for algorithm development and testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.