ArticleJAMA network open2023
Guiding Principles to Address the Impact of Algorithm Bias on Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health and Health Care.
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 124 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
124 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 197 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence Governance in Health Systems: Systematic Review of Frameworks and Integrative Model Proposal.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Use of AI to Predict and Support Medication Adherence in Patients With Breast Cancer: Systematic Review.JMIR cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Economic, ethical, and regulatory dimensions of artificial intelligence in healthcare: an integrative review.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Ethical and practical challenges of generative AI in healthcare and proposed solutions: a survey.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Pooled it
- Leveraging Preexisting Cardiovascular Data to Improve the Detection and Treatment of Hypertension: The NOTIFY-LVH Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA cardiology · 2025Trial
- The current state of demographic subgroup reporting for commercially available AI for radiology: a scoping review.European radiology · 2026Article
- Ethical and Legal Challenges of Partially and Fully Autonomous AI in Healthcare: Reinterpreting Liability and Preserving Trust.Bioethics · 2026Article
- When Innovation Leaves People Behind: Reframing Accountability in Commercial Digital Health.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence and Algorithmic Bias in Burn Care: A Literature Review of Ethical Challenges.Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Rheumatology and Systemic Inflammatory Diseases: From Pattern Recognition to Signal Analysis and Clinical Decision Support.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Clinician Perceptions of AI in Care: Cross-Sectional Survey.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Representational Veracity in Data Science Health Research: Targets, Proxies, Labels, and Descriptors.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- PREFER-IT: A transdisciplinary co-created framework to realise inclusive health AI.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Development of an AI-Enabled Remote Loneliness Assessment System for Older Adults Using Behavioral and Speech Data From IoT Sensors and Smart Speakers.Assessment · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in cardio-kidney-metabolic care: Transforming integrated disease management through data-informed innovation.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2026Review
- Reporting of race and ethnicity in studies of artificial intelligence in pediatric urology A secondary analysis of the AI-PEDURO online repository.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2026Review
- Bias and Fairness Across the Healthcare AI Lifecycle: A Clinician-Oriented Review.Balkan medical journal · 2026Review
- Whose Truth Is Ground Truth?: Consequences of Label Choice on Machine Learning Models Predicting Depression.Research square · 2026Article
- Mapping National Governance of AI for Health: Protocol for a Global Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Shaping the Future of Men's Health: How AI Could Be a Transformative Tool for Better Patient Outcomes and Provider Efficiency.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
64 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
21 authors at 12 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Health care algorithms are used for diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, risk stratification, and allocation of resources. Bias in the development and use of algorithms can lead to worse outcomes for racial and ethnic minoritized groups and other historically marginalized populations such as individuals with lower income. Objective: To provide a conceptual framework and guiding principles for mitigating and preventing bias in health care algorithms to promote health and health care equity. Evidence Review: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the National Institute for Minority Health and Health Disparities convened a diverse panel of experts to review evidence, hear from stakeholders, and receive community feedback. Findings: The panel developed a conceptual framework to apply guiding principles across an algorithm's life cycle, centering health and health care equity for patients and communities as the goal, within the wider context of structural racism and discrimination. Multiple stakeholders can mitigate and prevent bias at each phase of the algorithm life cycle, including problem formulation (phase 1); data selection, assessment, and management (phase 2); algorithm development, training, and validation (phase 3); deployment and integration of algorithms in intended settings (phase 4); and algorithm monitoring, maintenance, updating, or deimplementation (phase 5). Five principles should guide these efforts: (1) promote health and health care equity during all phases of the health care algorithm life cycle; (2) ensure health care algorithms and their use are transparent and explainable; (3) authentically engage patients and communities during all phases of the health care algorithm life cycle and earn trustworthiness; (4) explicitly identify health care algorithmic fairness issues and trade-offs; and (5) establish accountability for equity and fairness in outcomes from health care algorithms. Conclusions and Relevance: Multiple stakeholders must partner to create systems, processes, regulations, incentives, standards, and policies to mitigate and prevent algorithmic bias. Reforms should implement guiding principles that support promotion of health and health care equity in all phases of the algorithm life cycle as well as transparency and explainability, authentic community engagement and ethical partnerships, explicit identification of fairness issues and trade-offs, and accountability for equity and fairness.
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.