ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2024
Towards objective and systematic evaluation of bias in artificial intelligence for medical imaging.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bias Mitigation Across the Healthcare Artificial Intelligence Lifecycle: A Structured Narrative Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in thyroid ultrasound: clinical applications and perspectives.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
- A narrative review on artificial intelligence in neurosurgery: ethical challenges and implementation considerations.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- Integration of nested cross-validation, automated hyperparameter optimization, high-performance computing to reduce and quantify the variance of test performance estimation of deep learning models.Computer methods and programs in biomedicine · 2025Article
- Machine learning evaluation of pneumonia severity: subgroup performance in the Medical Imaging and Data Resource Center modified radiographic assessment of lung edema mastermind challenge.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
- Big data approaches for novel mechanistic insights on sleep and circadian rhythms: a workshop summary.Sleep · 2025Article
- Overcoming barriers in the use of artificial intelligence in point of care ultrasound.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Ethical Artificial Intelligence in Nursing Workforce Management and Policymaking: Bridging Philosophy and Practice.Journal of nursing management · 2025Article
- A roadmap to implementing machine learning in healthcare: from concept to practice.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Machine learning model MASKRCNN_RESNET50_FPN in image segmentation for the detection of the long head of biceps in arthroscopy images.Science progressArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveArtificial intelligence (AI) models trained using medical images for clinical tasks often exhibit bias in the form of subgroup performance disparities. However, since not all sources of bias in real-world medical imaging data are easily identifiable, it is challenging to comprehensively assess their impacts. In this article, we introduce an analysis framework for systematically and objectively investigating the impact of biases in medical images on AI models. MATERIALS AND
methodsOur framework utilizes synthetic neuroimages with known disease effects and sources of bias. We evaluated the impact of bias effects and the efficacy of 3 bias mitigation strategies in counterfactual data scenarios on a convolutional neural network (CNN) classifier.
resultsThe analysis revealed that training a CNN model on the datasets containing bias effects resulted in expected subgroup performance disparities. Moreover, reweighing was the most successful bias mitigation strategy for this setup. Finally, we demonstrated that explainable AI methods can aid in investigating the manifestation of bias in the model using this framework. DISCUSSION: The value of this framework is showcased in our findings on the impact of bias scenarios and efficacy of bias mitigation in a deep learning model pipeline. This systematic analysis can be easily expanded to conduct further controlled in silico trials in other investigations of bias in medical imaging AI.
conclusionOur novel methodology for objectively studying bias in medical imaging AI can help support the development of clinical decision-support tools that are robust and responsible.
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.