Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37358896›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2023

Risk of Bias Mitigation for Vulnerable and Diverse Groups in Community-Based Primary Health Care Artificial Intelligence Models: Protocol for a Rapid Review.

Maxime Sasseville, Steven Ouellet, Caroline Rhéaume, Vincent Couture, Philippe Després, Jean-Sébastien Paquette, Karine Gentelet, David Darmon, Frédéric Bergeron, Marie-Pierre Gagnon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

10 authors.

Maxime SassevilleFaculté des sciences infirmières, Université Laval, Quebec, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1694-1414
Steven OuelletFaculté des sciences infirmières, Université Laval, Quebec, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2158-0043
Caroline RhéaumeVITAM Research Center on Sustainable Health, Quebec, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1863-4410
Vincent CoutureFaculté des sciences infirmières, Université Laval, Quebec, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8811-0524
Philippe DesprésDépartement de physique, de génie physique et d'optique, Université Laval, Quebec, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4163-7353
Jean-Sébastien PaquetteVITAM Research Center on Sustainable Health, Quebec, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9524-6761
Karine GenteletDépartement des sciences sociales, Université du Québec en Outaouais, Gatineau, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1457-6348
David DarmonDirection du service et du centre de santé universitaire, Université Côte d'Azur, Nice, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4425-4163
Frédéric BergeronBibliothèque - Direction des services-conseils, Université Laval, Quebec, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0978-7420
Marie-Pierre GagnonFaculté des sciences infirmières, Université Laval, Quebec, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0782-5457

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe current literature identifies several potential benefits of artificial intelligence models for populations' health and health care systems' efficiency. However, there is a lack of understanding on how the risk of bias is considered in the development of primary health care and community health service artificial intelligence algorithms and to what extent they perpetuate or introduce potential biases toward groups that could be considered vulnerable in terms of their characteristics. To the best of our knowledge, no reviews are currently available to identify relevant methods to assess the risk of bias in these algorithms. The primary research question of this review is which strategies can assess the risk of bias in primary health care algorithms toward vulnerable or diverse groups?

objectiveThis review aims to identify relevant methods to assess the risk of bias toward vulnerable or diverse groups in the development or deployment of algorithms in community-based primary health care and mitigation interventions deployed to promote and increase equity, diversity, and inclusion. This review looks at what attempts to mitigate bias have been documented and which vulnerable or diverse groups have been considered.

methodsA rapid systematic review of the scientific literature will be conducted. In November 2022, an information specialist developed a specific search strategy based on the main concepts of our primary review question in 4 relevant databases in the last 5 years. We completed the search strategy in December 2022, and 1022 sources were identified. Since February 2023, two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts on the Covidence systematic review software. Conflicts are solved through consensus and discussion with a senior researcher. We include all studies on methods developed or tested to assess the risk of bias in algorithms that are relevant in community-based primary health care.

resultsIn early May 2023, almost 47% (479/1022) of the titles and abstracts have been screened. We completed this first stage in May 2023. In June and July 2023, two reviewers will independently apply the same criteria to full texts, and all exclusion motives will be recorded. Data from selected studies will be extracted using a validated grid in August and analyzed in September 2023. Results will be presented using structured qualitative narrative summaries and submitted for publication by the end of 2023.

conclusionsThe approach to identifying methods and target populations of this review is primarily qualitative. However, we will consider a meta-analysis if quantitative data and results are sufficient. This review will develop structured qualitative summaries of strategies to mitigate bias toward vulnerable populations and diverse groups in artificial intelligence models. This could be useful to researchers and other stakeholders to identify potential sources of bias in algorithms and try to reduce or eliminate them.

trial registrationOSF Registries qbph8; https://osf.io/qbph8. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/46684.

Indexed as

algorithmsartificial intelligencehealth disparityhealth equityprimary carerapid reviewsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37358896
PMCPMC10337340

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.