ArticleThe Lancet. Digital health2022
AI recognition of patient race in medical imaging: a modelling study.
Article in The Lancet. Digital health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 242 papers, 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
242 citing papers in PubMed, 4 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
- The value of artificial intelligence in ultrasound imaging for predicting molecular subtypes of breast cancer: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Deep-learning-based non-contrast CT for detecting acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review and HSROC meta-analysis of patient-level diagnostic accuracy.BMC neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Tackling algorithmic bias and promoting transparency in health datasets: the STANDING Together consensus recommendations.The Lancet. Digital health · 2025Pooled it
- Trial
- Merging artificial intelligence into cancer nursing care: Current applications, challenges, and opportunities.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2026Article
- The current state of demographic subgroup reporting for commercially available AI for radiology: a scoping review.European radiology · 2026Article
- Improving racial fairness in brain age models using style-transfer synthesis.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Large language models in ophthalmology: promise, peril, and the urgent need for guardrails.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Challenges in medical algorithmic fairness.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2026Review
- The Missing Millions: Building Cancer Pathology Artificial Intelligence for Safety Net Populations.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2026Review
- Glioma Segmentation on Multicenter 2D-Based Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using Low-Rank Adaptation Tuning of a Foundation Model: An External Test Evaluation.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Towards High-Accuracy Athletic Injury Predictions Using a First-Principles Modelling Approach: Theory to (Future) Practice.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- AI alignment in medical imaging: Unveiling hidden biases through counterfactual analysis.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment.Cancer medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Meaningful oversight of medical AI beyond human in the loop.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Benchmarking Multimodal Large Language Models for Cardiopulmonary Findings on Chest Radiographs: Sex-Stratified Discrimination and Operating Characteristics.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Social Identity Theory of Digital Identity.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2026Article
- Encoding Versus Linear Use of Patient Characteristics in Chest X-Ray Foundation Models on MIMIC-CXR.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
182 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on byBeyond the2023
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies in medical imaging have shown disparate abilities of artificial intelligence (AI) to detect a person's race, yet there is no known correlation for race on medical imaging that would be obvious to human experts when interpreting the images. We aimed to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the ability of AI to recognise a patient's racial identity from medical images.
methodsUsing private (Emory CXR, Emory Chest CT, Emory Cervical Spine, and Emory Mammogram) and public (MIMIC-CXR, CheXpert, National Lung Cancer Screening Trial, RSNA Pulmonary Embolism CT, and Digital Hand Atlas) datasets, we evaluated, first, performance quantification of deep learning models in detecting race from medical images, including the ability of these models to generalise to external environments and across multiple imaging modalities. Second, we assessed possible confounding of anatomic and phenotypic population features by assessing the ability of these hypothesised confounders to detect race in isolation using regression models, and by re-evaluating the deep learning models by testing them on datasets stratified by these hypothesised confounding variables. Last, by exploring the effect of image corruptions on model performance, we investigated the underlying mechanism by which AI models can recognise race.
findingsIn our study, we show that standard AI deep learning models can be trained to predict race from medical images with high performance across multiple imaging modalities, which was sustained under external validation conditions (x-ray imaging [area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) range 0·91-0·99], CT chest imaging [0·87-0·96], and mammography [0·81]). We also showed that this detection is not due to proxies or imaging-related surrogate covariates for race (eg, performance of possible confounders: body-mass index [AUC 0·55], disease distribution [0·61], and breast density [0·61]). Finally, we provide evidence to show that the ability of AI deep learning models persisted over all anatomical regions and frequency spectrums of the images, suggesting the efforts to control this behaviour when it is undesirable will be challenging and demand further study.
interpretationThe results from our study emphasise that the ability of AI deep learning models to predict self-reported race is itself not the issue of importance. However, our finding that AI can accurately predict self-reported race, even from corrupted, cropped, and noised medical images, often when clinical experts cannot, creates an enormous risk for all model deployments in medical imaging.
fundingNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, MIDRC grant of National Institutes of Health, US National Science Foundation, National Library of Medicine of the National Institutes of Health, and Taiwan Ministry of Science and Technology.
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.