ArticleCell reports. Medicine2025
Contrastive learning enhances fairness in pathology artificial intelligence systems.
Article in Cell reports. Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data distribution impacts the performance and generalisability of contrastive learning-based foundation models of electrocardiograms.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Standardized, repeatable ulcerative colitis histology scoring and endpoint assessment using an automated, foundation model-based tool.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in small tissue biopsies: diagnostic applications, histochemical integration, and methodological challenges in surgical pathology.Histochemistry and cell biology · 2026Review
- Review
- Artificial Intelligence Basics for Head and Neck Pathologists: A Simple Guide.Head and neck pathology · 2026Review
- Neurovictimology and the risks of neurotechnologies and artificial intelligence: a forensic and legal perspective.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
29 authors.
Funding
Abstract
AI-enhanced pathology evaluation systems hold significant potential to improve cancer diagnosis but frequently exhibit biases against underrepresented populations due to limited diversity in training data. Here, we present the Fairness-aware Artificial Intelligence Review for Pathology (FAIR-Path), a framework that leverages contrastive learning and weakly supervised machine learning to mitigate bias in AI-based pathology evaluation. In a pan-cancer AI fairness analysis spanning 20 cancer types, we identify significant performance disparities in 29.3% of diagnostic tasks across demographic groups defined by self-reported race, gender, and age. FAIR-Path effectively mitigates 88.5% of these disparities, with external validation showing a 91.1% reduction in performance gaps across 15 independent cohorts. We find that variations in somatic mutation prevalence among populations contribute to these performance disparities. FAIR-Path represents a promising step toward addressing fairness challenges in AI-powered pathology diagnoses and provides a robust framework for mitigating bias in medical AI applications.
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.