Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41426766›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Apples-to-Apples: Age-Sex Standardisation of Public Chest X-ray Datasets.

Amr Badawy, Maiar Elhariry, Amrit Chirrimar, Ashrit Chohan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Amr BadawyGeneral Surgery, Midlands Metropolitan University Hospital, Birmingham, GBR.
Maiar ElhariryHospital-Based Medicine, Midlands Metropolitan University Hospital, Birmingham, GBR.
Amrit ChirrimarGeneral Surgery, Midlands Metropolitan University Hospital, Birmingham, GBR.
Ashrit ChohanAcute Medicine, Sandwell and West Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Public chest radiograph datasets are widely used for model development and benchmarking, but differences in patient demographics can inflate apparent between-dataset differences in disease label prevalence. Objective To quantify the proportion of NIH ChestX-ray14 versus CheXpert prevalence differences that is explained by age and sex alone. Methods A cross-sectional analysis of NIH ChestX-ray14 (n=112,120 studies) and CheXpert (n=223,413) databases was performed. Sex was harmonised to Male/Female and age was categorised as 0-17, 18-39, 40-59, 60-79, and ≥80 years. Five shared labels were assessed: consolidation, atelectasis, pleural effusion, edema, and cardiomegaly. For CheXpert, label uncertainty (-1) was treated as negative in the primary analysis. For each label, we calculated crude prevalence with Wilson 95% confidence intervals and compared datasets using a two-proportion z-test. We then performed direct standardisation by reweighting CheXpert age-sex strata to the NIH age-sex distribution and reported the reduction in the crude prevalence gap attributable to age-sex adjustment. Results Crude prevalence was higher in CheXpert than NIH for all labels (all p<0.001). After age-sex standardisation, CheXpert prevalence decreased for every label, indicating that demographics account for a substantial share of between-dataset differences. For consolidation, the crude gap of 1.96 percentage points (6.12% vs 4.16%) decreased to a standardised gap of 1.47 percentage points (CheXpert standardised 5.63% vs NIH 4.16%), representing approximately a 25% reduction. For atelectasis, the gap declined from 4.85 to 2.84 percentage points (41% reduction approx.). For pleural effusion, the gap declined from 28.10 to 19.03 percentage points (32% reduction approx.). For edema, the gap declined from 21.70 to 14.78 percentage points (32% reduction approx.). For cardiomegaly, the gap declined from 9.45 to 6.55 percentage points (31% reduction approx.). Across labels, age-sex standardisation explained approximately 25% to 40% of the crude prevalence differences. Conclusion A simple age-sex standardisation step explains a large proportion of apparent label prevalence differences between NIH ChestX-ray14 and CheXpert. Routine reporting of standardised prevalence alongside crude estimates and demographic composition can improve fairness and interpretability in cross-dataset benchmarking and reduce the risk of attributing demographic composition effects to labelling or model performance.

Indexed as

ai and machine learningartifical intelligencebig data analyticsbig data analytics and machine learningdataset biashealth informatics big dataradiologyradiology research

Identifiers

PMID41426766
PMCPMC12716848

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.