Towards Clinical AI Fairness: Filling Gaps in the Puzzle

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.17921v1
• Date: Tue, 28 May 2024 07:42:55 GMT
• Title: Towards Clinical AI Fairness: Filling Gaps in the Puzzle
• Authors: Mingxuan Liu, Yilin Ning, Salinelat Teixayavong, Xiaoxuan Liu, Mayli Mertens, Yuqing Shang, Xin Li, Di Miao, Jie Xu, Daniel Shu Wei Ting, Lionel Tim-Ee Cheng, Jasmine Chiat Ling Ong, Zhen Ling Teo, Ting Fang Tan, Narrendar RaviChandran, Fei Wang, Leo Anthony Celi, Marcus Eng Hock Ong, Nan Liu,
• Abstract summary: This review systematically pinpoints several deficiencies concerning both healthcare data and the provided AI fairness solutions. We highlight the scarcity of research on AI fairness in many medical domains where AI technology is increasingly utilized. To bridge these gaps, our review advances actionable strategies for both the healthcare and AI research communities.
• Score: 15.543248260582217
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The ethical integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in healthcare necessitates addressing fairness-a concept that is highly context-specific across medical fields. Extensive studies have been conducted to expand the technical components of AI fairness, while tremendous calls for AI fairness have been raised from healthcare. Despite this, a significant disconnect persists between technical advancements and their practical clinical applications, resulting in a lack of contextualized discussion of AI fairness in clinical settings. Through a detailed evidence gap analysis, our review systematically pinpoints several deficiencies concerning both healthcare data and the provided AI fairness solutions. We highlight the scarcity of research on AI fairness in many medical domains where AI technology is increasingly utilized. Additionally, our analysis highlights a substantial reliance on group fairness, aiming to ensure equality among demographic groups from a macro healthcare system perspective; in contrast, individual fairness, focusing on equity at a more granular level, is frequently overlooked. To bridge these gaps, our review advances actionable strategies for both the healthcare and AI research communities. Beyond applying existing AI fairness methods in healthcare, we further emphasize the importance of involving healthcare professionals to refine AI fairness concepts and methods to ensure contextually relevant and ethically sound AI applications in healthcare.

Related papers

• Fair by design: A sociotechnical approach to justifying the fairness of AI-enabled systems across the lifecycle [0.8164978442203773]
  Fairness is one of the most commonly identified ethical principles in existing AI guidelines. The development of fair AI-enabled systems is required by new and emerging AI regulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T12:03:29Z)
• FUTURE-AI: International consensus guideline for trustworthy and deployable artificial intelligence in healthcare [73.78776682247187]
  Concerns have been raised about the technical, clinical, ethical and legal risks associated with medical AI. This work describes the FUTURE-AI guideline as the first international consensus framework for guiding the development and deployment of trustworthy AI tools in healthcare.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-11T10:49:05Z)
• Towards FATE in AI for Social Media and Healthcare: A Systematic Review [0.0]
  This survey focuses on the concepts of fairness, accountability, transparency, and ethics (FATE) within the context of AI. We found that statistical and intersectional fairness can support fairness in healthcare on social media platforms. While solutions like simulation, data analytics, and automated systems are widely used, their effectiveness can vary.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-05T17:25:42Z)
• Towards clinical AI fairness: A translational perspective [13.061383127966872]
  We discuss the misalignment between technical and clinical perspectives of AI fairness. We advocate multidisciplinary collaboration to bridge the knowledge gap, and provide possible solutions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-26T12:38:40Z)
• Ensuring Trustworthy Medical Artificial Intelligence through Ethical and Philosophical Principles [4.705984758887425]
  AI-based computer-assisted diagnosis and treatment tools can democratize healthcare by matching the clinical level or surpassing clinical experts. The democratization of such AI tools can reduce the cost of care, optimize resource allocation, and improve the quality of care. integrating AI into healthcare raises several ethical and philosophical concerns, such as bias, transparency, autonomy, responsibility, and accountability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-23T04:14:18Z)
• Fairness in AI and Its Long-Term Implications on Society [68.8204255655161]
  We take a closer look at AI fairness and analyze how lack of AI fairness can lead to deepening of biases over time. We discuss how biased models can lead to more negative real-world outcomes for certain groups. If the issues persist, they could be reinforced by interactions with other risks and have severe implications on society in the form of social unrest.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-16T11:22:59Z)
• 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)
• Detecting Shortcut Learning for Fair Medical AI using Shortcut Testing [62.9062883851246]
  Machine learning holds great promise for improving healthcare, but it is critical to ensure that its use will not propagate or amplify health disparities. One potential driver of algorithmic unfairness, shortcut learning, arises when ML models base predictions on improper correlations in the training data. Using multi-task learning, we propose the first method to assess and mitigate shortcut learning as a part of the fairness assessment of clinical ML systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-21T09:35:38Z)
• Fair Machine Learning in Healthcare: A Review [90.22219142430146]
  We analyze the intersection of fairness in machine learning and healthcare disparities. We provide a critical review of the associated fairness metrics from a machine learning standpoint. We propose several new research directions that hold promise for developing ethical and equitable ML applications in healthcare.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-29T04:32:10Z)
• Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
  This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them. We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives. We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z)
• Algorithm Fairness in AI for Medicine and Healthcare [4.626801344708786]
  algorithm fairness is a challenging problem in delivering equitable care. Recent evaluation of AI models stratified across race sub-populations have revealed enormous inequalities in how patients are diagnosed, given treatments, and billed for healthcare costs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-01T18:18:13Z)

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.