Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35463778›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022

Fairness in Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Assessing Sex and Racial Bias in Deep Learning-Based Segmentation.

Esther Puyol-Antón, Bram Ruijsink, Jorge Mariscal Harana, Stefan K Piechnik, Stefan Neubauer, Steffen E Petersen, Reza Razavi, Phil Chowienczyk, Andrew P King

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Esther Puyol-AntónSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Bram RuijsinkSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Jorge Mariscal HaranaSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Stefan K PiechnikDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Stefan NeubauerDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Steffen E PetersenNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Barts Biomedical Research Centre, William Harvey Research Institute, Queen Mary University London, London, United Kingdom.
Reza RazaviSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Phil ChowienczykSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Andrew P KingSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

British Heart Foundation PG/14/89/31194Medical Research Council MC_PC_17228Medical Research Council MC_QA137853Medical Research Council MR/M016560/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) techniques have been proposed for automation of cine CMR segmentation for functional quantification. However, in other applications AI models have been shown to have potential for sex and/or racial bias. The objective of this paper is to perform the first analysis of sex/racial bias in AI-based cine CMR segmentation using a large-scale database. Methods: A state-of-the-art deep learning (DL) model was used for automatic segmentation of both ventricles and the myocardium from cine short-axis CMR. The dataset consisted of end-diastole and end-systole short-axis cine CMR images of 5,903 subjects from the UK Biobank database (61.5 ± 7.1 years, 52% male, 81% white). To assess sex and racial bias, we compared Dice scores and errors in measurements of biventricular volumes and function between patients grouped by race and sex. To investigate whether segmentation bias could be explained by potential confounders, a multivariate linear regression and ANCOVA were performed. Results: Results on the overall population showed an excellent agreement between the manual and automatic segmentations. We found statistically significant differences in Dice scores between races (white ∼94% vs. minority ethnic groups 86-89%) as well as in absolute/relative errors in volumetric and functional measures, showing that the AI model was biased against minority racial groups, even after correction for possible confounders. The results of a multivariate linear regression analysis showed that no covariate could explain the Dice score bias between racial groups. However, for the Mixed and Black race groups, sex showed a weak positive association with the Dice score. The results of an ANCOVA analysis showed that race was the main factor that can explain the overall difference in Dice scores between racial groups. Conclusion: We have shown that racial bias can exist in DL-based cine CMR segmentation models when training with a database that is sex-balanced but not race-balanced such as the UK Biobank.

Indexed as

cardiac magnetic resonancedeep learningfair AIinequality fairness in deep learning-based CMR segmentationsegmentation

Identifiers

PMID35463778
PMCPMC9021445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.