ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026
Enhancing segmentation fairness through curriculum learning and progressive loss: a centralized and federated perspective on radiograph analysis.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Automated thigh muscle segmentation using foundation models: validation and impact of segmentation quality.European radiology experimental · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bias in medical image segmentation can lead to unequal performance across demographic subgroups, raising concerns about fairness and reliability in clinical AI systems. While deep learning models have achieved high segmentation accuracy, ensuring equitable performance across race and gender remains a significant challenge, particularly in privacy-sensitive healthcare environments. Methods: This study investigates fairness-aware medical image segmentation for hip and knee radiographs using deep learning models evaluated in both centralized and Federated Learning (FL) settings. We introduce Curriculum Learning (CL) strategies and Progressive Loss (PL) functions to regulate sample difficulty during training. In addition, we propose two novel fairness-oriented federated learning algorithms, Federated Intersection over Union (FedIoU) and Federated Intersection over Union with Outlier Analysis (FedIoUoutlier). Experiments are conducted using multiple segmentation backbones and simulated multi-site data partitions derived from the Osteoarthritis Initiative dataset. Model performance is evaluated using Intersection over Union (IoU), IoU standard deviation, Skewed Error Ratio (SER), and Min-Max Disparity across race and gender subgroups. Statistical significance was verified using paired Results: Across both hip and knee segmentation tasks, curriculum learning and progressive loss strategies consistently improved segmentation accuracy and reduced demographic performance disparities in centralized training. In federated settings, fairness-aware aggregation further enhanced performance. Notably, FedIoUoutlier combined with balanced curriculum learning and tiered progressive loss achieved the highest mean IoU while yielding the lowest SER and Min-Max Disparity, indicating improved fairness without sacrificing accuracy. In several configurations, federated models matched or exceeded the performance of optimized centralized models, with statistically significant improvements in per-sample IoU over baseline configurations. Conclusion: The results demonstrate that structured training strategies and fairness-aware federated aggregation can jointly improve accuracy, stability, and demographic fairness in medical image segmentation. By integrating curriculum learning, progressive loss, and novel FL algorithms, this work provides a practical pathway toward equitable and privacy-preserving AI systems for medical imaging.
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.