A survey of recent methods for addressing AI fairness and bias in biomedicine

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.08250v1
• Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2024 06:38:46 GMT
• Title: A survey of recent methods for addressing AI fairness and bias in biomedicine
• Authors: Yifan Yang, Mingquan Lin, Han Zhao, Yifan Peng, Furong Huang, Zhiyong Lu
• Abstract summary: Artificial intelligence systems may perpetuate social inequities or demonstrate biases, such as those based on race or gender. We surveyed recent publications on different debiasing methods in the fields of biomedical natural language processing (NLP) or computer vision (CV) We performed a literature search on PubMed, ACM digital library, and IEEE Xplore of relevant articles published between January 2018 and December 2023 using multiple combinations of keywords. We reviewed other potential methods from the general domain that could be applied to biomedicine to address bias and improve fairness.
• Score: 48.46929081146017
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) systems have the potential to revolutionize clinical practices, including improving diagnostic accuracy and surgical decision-making, while also reducing costs and manpower. However, it is important to recognize that these systems may perpetuate social inequities or demonstrate biases, such as those based on race or gender. Such biases can occur before, during, or after the development of AI models, making it critical to understand and address potential biases to enable the accurate and reliable application of AI models in clinical settings. To mitigate bias concerns during model development, we surveyed recent publications on different debiasing methods in the fields of biomedical natural language processing (NLP) or computer vision (CV). Then we discussed the methods that have been applied in the biomedical domain to address bias. We performed our literature search on PubMed, ACM digital library, and IEEE Xplore of relevant articles published between January 2018 and December 2023 using multiple combinations of keywords. We then filtered the result of 10,041 articles automatically with loose constraints, and manually inspected the abstracts of the remaining 890 articles to identify the 55 articles included in this review. Additional articles in the references are also included in this review. We discuss each method and compare its strengths and weaknesses. Finally, we review other potential methods from the general domain that could be applied to biomedicine to address bias and improve fairness.The bias of AIs in biomedicine can originate from multiple sources. Existing debiasing methods that focus on algorithms can be categorized into distributional or algorithmic.

Related papers

• AI in radiological imaging of soft-tissue and bone tumours: a systematic review evaluating against CLAIM and FUTURE-AI guidelines [1.5332408886895255]
  Soft-tissue and bone tumours (STBT) are rare, diagnostically challenging lesions with variable clinical behaviours and treatment approaches. This systematic review provides an overview of Artificial Intelligence (AI) methods using radiological imaging for diagnosis and prognosis of these tumours.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-22T15:31:48Z)
• Autonomous Artificial Intelligence Agents for Clinical Decision Making in Oncology [0.6397820821509177]
  We introduce an alternative approach to multimodal medical AI that utilizes the generalist capabilities of a large language model (LLM) as a central reasoning engine. This engine autonomously coordinates and deploys a set of specialized medical AI tools. We show that the system has a high capability in employing appropriate tools (97%), drawing correct conclusions (93.6%), and providing complete (94%), and helpful (89.2%) recommendations for individual patient cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-06T15:50:19Z)
• Detecting algorithmic bias in medical-AI models using trees [7.939586935057782]
  This paper presents an innovative framework for detecting areas of algorithmic bias in medical-AI decision support systems. Our approach efficiently identifies potential biases in medical-AI models, specifically in the context of sepsis prediction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-05T18:47:34Z)
• Towards objective and systematic evaluation of bias in artificial intelligence for medical imaging [2.0890189482817165]
  We introduce a novel analysis framework for investigating the impact of biases in medical images on AI models. We developed and tested this framework for conducting controlled in silico trials to assess bias in medical imaging AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T01:37:28Z)
• Unmasking Bias in AI: A Systematic Review of Bias Detection and Mitigation Strategies in Electronic Health Record-based Models [6.300835344100545]
  Leveraging artificial intelligence in conjunction with electronic health records holds transformative potential to improve healthcare. Yet, addressing bias in AI, which risks worsening healthcare disparities, cannot be overlooked. This study reviews methods to detect and mitigate diverse forms of bias in AI models developed using EHR data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-30T18:29:15Z)
• BiomedGPT: A Generalist Vision-Language Foundation Model for Diverse Biomedical Tasks [68.39821375903591]
  Generalist AI holds the potential to address limitations due to its versatility in interpreting different data types. Here, we propose BiomedGPT, the first open-source and lightweight vision-language foundation model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-26T17:14:43Z)
• The Role of AI in Drug Discovery: Challenges, Opportunities, and Strategies [97.5153823429076]
  The benefits, challenges and drawbacks of AI in this field are reviewed. The use of data augmentation, explainable AI, and the integration of AI with traditional experimental methods are also discussed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-08T23:23:39Z)
• Domain-Specific Pretraining for Vertical Search: Case Study on Biomedical Literature [67.4680600632232]
  Self-supervised learning has emerged as a promising direction to overcome the annotation bottleneck. We propose a general approach for vertical search based on domain-specific pretraining. Our system can scale to tens of millions of articles on PubMed and has been deployed as Microsoft Biomedical Search.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-25T01:02:55Z)
• CBLUE: A Chinese Biomedical Language Understanding Evaluation Benchmark [51.38557174322772]
  We present the first Chinese Biomedical Language Understanding Evaluation benchmark. It is a collection of natural language understanding tasks including named entity recognition, information extraction, clinical diagnosis normalization, single-sentence/sentence-pair classification. We report empirical results with the current 11 pre-trained Chinese models, and experimental results show that state-of-the-art neural models perform by far worse than the human ceiling.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-15T12:25:30Z)
• Bias in Multimodal AI: Testbed for Fair Automatic Recruitment [73.85525896663371]
  We study how current multimodal algorithms based on heterogeneous sources of information are affected by sensitive elements and inner biases in the data. We train automatic recruitment algorithms using a set of multimodal synthetic profiles consciously scored with gender and racial biases. Our methodology and results show how to generate fairer AI-based tools in general, and in particular fairer automated recruitment systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-15T15:58:05Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.