ArticleJAMA network open2023
Perceptions of Data Set Experts on Important Characteristics of Health Data Sets Ready for Machine Learning: A Qualitative Study.
Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethics of Autonomous AI Clinical Trials: Delphi Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- From Medical Records to AI-Ready Datasets: A Practical Guide for Clinical Researchers.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Anonymization and visualization of health data and biomarkers.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Managing maternity: Moving care, not patients, using artificial intelligence (AI), internet-of-things (IOT) and point-of-care testing (POCT) devices.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
- AI-readiness Criteria for Biomedical Data.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- CystoDS: a multiclass endoscopy image dataset for artificial intelligence-assisted bladder cancer detection.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Using voice and speech data in healthcare: a scoping review of the ethical, legal and social implications.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Preparing clinical research data for artificial intelligence readiness: insights from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases data centric challenge.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Rethinking the use of population descriptors in dermatology trials and beyond: disentangling race and ethnicity from skin color.Archives of dermatological research · 2025Article
- Limb biomechanics in combat sports: insights from wearable sensor technology.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Article
- Explainable artificial intelligence in breast cancer detection and risk prediction: A systematic scoping review.Cancer innovation · 2024Article
- Acupuncture indication knowledge bases: meridian entity recognition and classification based on ACUBERT.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2024Article
- NNI Nanoinformatics Conference 2023: Movement Toward a Common Infrastructure for Federal nanoEHS Data Computational Toxicology: Short Communication.Computational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024Article
- Machine learning for healthcare that matters: Reorienting from technical novelty to equitable impact.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Prediction of hyperuricemia in people taking low-dose aspirin using a machine learning algorithm: a cross-sectional study of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Multiple approaches to advance health equity in nursing science: Recruitment, data, and dissemination.Nursing outlookArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: The lack of data quality frameworks to guide the development of artificial intelligence (AI)-ready data sets limits their usefulness for machine learning (ML) research in health care and hinders the diagnostic excellence of developed clinical AI applications for patient care. Objective: To discern what constitutes high-quality and useful data sets for health and biomedical ML research purposes according to subject matter experts. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study interviewed data set experts, particularly those who are creators and ML researchers. Semistructured interviews were conducted in English and remotely through a secure video conferencing platform between August 23, 2022, and January 5, 2023. A total of 93 experts were invited to participate. Twenty experts were enrolled and interviewed. Using purposive sampling, experts were affiliated with a diverse representation of 16 health data sets/databases across organizational sectors. Content analysis was used to evaluate survey information and thematic analysis was used to analyze interview data. Main Outcomes and Measures: Data set experts' perceptions on what makes data sets AI ready. Results: Participants included 20 data set experts (11 [55%] men; mean [SD] age, 42 [11] years), of whom all were health data set creators, and 18 of the 20 were also ML researchers. Themes (3 main and 11 subthemes) were identified and integrated into an AI-readiness framework to show their association within the health data ecosystem. Participants partially determined the AI readiness of data sets using priority appraisal elements of accuracy, completeness, consistency, and fitness. Ethical acquisition and societal impact emerged as appraisal considerations in that participant samples have not been described to date in prior data quality frameworks. Factors that drive creation of high-quality health data sets and mitigate risks associated with data reuse in ML research were also relevant to AI readiness. The state of data availability, data quality standards, documentation, team science, and incentivization were associated with elements of AI readiness and the overall perception of data set usefulness. Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study of data set experts, participants contributed to the development of a grounded framework for AI data set quality. Data set AI readiness required the concerted appraisal of many elements and the balancing of transparency and ethical reflection against pragmatic constraints. The movement toward more reliable, relevant, and ethical AI and ML applications for patient care will inevitably require strategic updates to data set creation practices.
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.