Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41775892›Full record

ReviewNPJ cardiovascular health2024

Artificial intelligence bias in the prediction and detection of cardiovascular disease.

Ariana Mihan, Ambarish Pandey, Harriette G C Van Spall

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in NPJ cardiovascular health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Wearable Flexible Sensors for Cardiovascular Disease Monitoring.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. The digital divide in cardiovascular care: who gets left behind?European heart journal. Digital health · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Advancing Cardiovascular, Kidney, and Metabolic Medicine: A Narrative Review of Insights and Innovations for the Future.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2025
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

3 authors.

Ariana MihanDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Ambarish PandeyUniversity of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA.
Harriette G C Van SpallDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada. harriette.vanspall@phri.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AI algorithms can identify those at risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), allowing for early intervention to change the trajectory of disease. However, AI bias can arise from any step in the development, validation, and evaluation of algorithms. Biased algorithms can perform poorly in historically marginalized groups, amplifying healthcare inequities on the basis of age, sex or gender, race or ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. In this perspective, we discuss the sources and consequences of AI bias in CVD prediction or detection. We present an AI health equity framework and review bias mitigation strategies that can be adopted during the AI lifecycle.

Identifiers

PMID41775892
PMCPMC12912404

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.