Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40940655›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025

FanFAIR: sensitive data sets semi-automatic fairness assessment.

Chiara Gallese, Teresa Scantamburlo, Luca Manzoni, Simone Giannerini, Marco S Nobile

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

5 authors.

Chiara GalleseDepartment of Law, University of Turin, Lungo Dora Siena 100, 10153, Turin, Italy. chiara.gallese@unito.it.
Teresa ScantamburloDepartment of Mathematics, Informatics and Geosciences, University of Trieste, Via Edoardo Weiss 2, 34127, Trieste, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3769-8874
Luca ManzoniDepartment of Mathematics, Informatics and Geosciences, University of Trieste, Via Edoardo Weiss 2, 34127, Trieste, Italy.
Simone GianneriniDepartment of Economics and Statistics, University of Udine, Via Tomadini 30/A, 33100, Udine, Italy.
Marco S NobileDepartment of Environmental Sciences, Informatics and Statistics, Ca' Foscari University of Venice, Via Torino 155, 30172, Mestre, VE, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7692-7203

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResearch has shown how data sets convey social bias in Artificial Intelligence systems, especially those based on machine learning. A biased data set is not representative of reality and might contribute to perpetuate societal biases within the model. To tackle this problem, it is important to understand how to avoid biases, errors, and unethical practices while creating the data sets. In order to provide guidance for the use of data sets in contexts of critical decision-making, such as health decisions, we identified six fundamental data set features (balance, numerosity, unevenness, compliance, quality, incompleteness) that could affect model fairness. These features were the foundation for the FanFAIR framework.

resultsWe extended the FanFAIR framework for the semi-automated evaluation of fairness in data sets, by combining statistical information on data with qualitative features. In particular, we present an improved version of FanFAIR which introduces novel outlier detection capabilities working in multivariate fashion, using two state-of-the-art methods: the Empirical Cumulative-distribution Outlier Detection (ECOD) and Isolation Forest. We also introduce a novel metric for data set balance, based on an entropy measure.

conclusionWe addressed the issue of how much (un)fairness can be included in a data set used for machine learning research, focusing on classification issues. We developed a rule-based approach based on fuzzy logic that combines these characteristics into a single score and enables a semi-automatic evaluation of a data set in algorithmic fairness research. Our tool produces a detailed visual report about the fairness of the data set. We show the effectiveness of FanFAIR by applying the method on two open data sets.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDatasets as TopicMachine LearningData AnalyticsHumansSoft ComputingData biasFairnessFuzzy logicTrustworthy artificial intelligence

Identifiers

PMID40940655
PMCPMC12427094

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.