ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2024
Enhancement of Fairness in AI for Chest X-ray Classification.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improving racial fairness in brain age models using style-transfer synthesis.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Community medical centers struggle to produce well-calibrated clinical prediction models: Data augmentation can help.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2026Article
- Reward-Guided Generation Improves the Scientific Utility of Synthetic Biomedical Data.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Trustworthy AI for radar vital signs: detecting and mitigating gender bias in healthcare.Complex & intelligent systems · 2026Article
- Role and Use of Race in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Models Related to Health.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine has shown promise to improve the quality of healthcare decisions. However, AI can be biased in a manner that produces unfair predictions for certain demographic subgroups. In MIMIC-CXR, a publicly available dataset of over 300,000 chest X-ray images, diagnostic AI has been shown to have a higher false negative rate for racial minorities. We evaluated the capacity of synthetic data augmentation, oversampling, and demographic-based corrections to enhance the fairness of AI predictions. We show that adjusting unfair predictions for demographic attributes, such as race, is ineffective at improving fairness or predictive performance. However, using oversampling and synthetic data augmentation to modify disease prevalence reduced such disparities by 74.7% and 10.6%, respectively. Moreover, such fairness gains were accomplished without reduction in performance (95% CI AUC: [0.816, 0.820] versus [0.810, 0.819] versus [0.817, 0.821] for baseline, oversampling, and augmentation, respectively).
Indexed as
Identifiers
40417510PMC12099404What 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.