Lack of Transparency and Potential Bias in Artificial Intelligence Data Sets and Algorithms A Scoping Review

被引:133
|
作者
Daneshjou, Roxana [1 ,2 ]
Smith, Mary P. [3 ]
Sun, Mary D. [4 ]
Rotemberg, Veronica [5 ]
Zou, James [6 ,7 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Stanford Sch Med, Stanford Dept Dermatol, 450 Broadway, Redwood City, CA 94061 USA
[2] Stanford Sch Med, Stanford Dept Biomed Data Sci, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[3] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Med, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10021 USA
[4] Icahn Sch Med Mt Sinai, New York, NY 10029 USA
[5] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dermatol Serv, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10021 USA
[6] Stanford Univ, Dept Elect Engn, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[7] Stanford Univ, Dept Biomed Data Sci, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[8] Chan Zuckerberg Biohub, San Francisco, CA USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会; 美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
CONVOLUTIONAL NEURAL-NETWORK; SKIN-CANCER; IMAGE CLASSIFICATION; DERMATOLOGISTS; MELANOMA; PERFORMANCE; DIAGNOSIS; TIME; ACCURACY; SUPERIOR;
D O I
10.1001/jamadermatol.2021.3129
中图分类号
R75 [皮肤病学与性病学];
学科分类号
100206 ;
摘要
IMPORTANCE Clinical artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms have the potential to improve clinical care, but fair, generalizable algorithms depend on the clinical data on which they are trained and tested. OBJECTIVE To assess whether data sets used for training diagnostic AI algorithms addressing skin disease are adequately described and to identify potential sources of bias in these data sets. DATA SOURCES In this scoping review, PubMed was used to search for peer-reviewed research articles published between January 1, 2015, and November 1, 2020, with the following paired search terms: deep learning and dermatology, artificial intelligence and dermatology, deep learning and dermatologist, and artificial intelligence and dermatologist. STUDY SELECTION Studies that developed or tested an existing deep learning algorithm for triage, diagnosis, or monitoring using clinical or dermoscopic images of skin disease were selected, and the articles were independently reviewed by 2 investigators to verify that they met selection criteria. CONSENSUS PROCESS Data set audit criteria were determined by consensus of all authors after reviewing existing literature to highlight data set transparency and sources of bias. RESULTS A total of 70 unique studies were included. Among these studies, 1 065 291 images were used to develop or test AI algorithms, of which only 257 372 (24.2%) were publicly available. Only 14 studies (20.0%) included descriptions of patient ethnicity or race in at least 1 data set used. Only 7 studies (10.0%) included any information about skin tone in at least 1 data set used. Thirty-six of the 56 studies developing new AI algorithms for cutaneous malignant neoplasms (64.3%) met the gold standard criteria for disease labeling. Public data sets were cited more often than private data sets, suggesting that public data sets contribute more to new development and benchmarks. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This scoping review identified 3 issues in data sets that are used to develop and test clinical AI algorithms for skin disease that should be addressed before clinical translation: (1) sparsity of data set characterization and lack of transparency, (2) nonstandard and unverified disease labels, and (3) inability to fully assess patient diversity used for algorithm development and testing.
引用
收藏
页码:1362 / 1369
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] THE RIGHT TO ALGORITHMIC TRANSPARENCY IN BIG DATA AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
    Arellano Toledo, Wilma
    REVISTA GENERAL DE DERECHO ADMINISTRATIVO, 2019, (50):
  • [42] UNLEASHING THE POTENTIAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN GENOMIC BIOMARKER TESTING FOR PRECISION ONCOLOGY: A SCOPING REVIEW
    Buch, F.
    Madhukumar, M.
    Nallamothu, B.
    Chhaya, V
    Khambholja, K.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2023, 26 (12) : S395 - S395
  • [43] Artificial Intelligence (AI): A Potential Game Changer in Regenerative Orthopedics-A Scoping Review
    Vaishya, Raju
    Dhall, Sakshi
    Vaish, Abhishek
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDICS, 2024, 58 (10) : 1362 - 1374
  • [44] Assessing and Mitigating Bias in Artificial Intelligence: A Review
    Sinha A.
    Sapra D.
    Sinwar D.
    Singh V.
    Raghuwanshi G.
    Recent Advances in Computer Science and Communications, 2024, 17 (01) : 1 - 10
  • [45] Improving fairness of artificial intelligence algorithms in Privileged-Group Selection Bias data settings
    Pessach, Dana
    Shmueli, Erez
    EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, 2021, 185
  • [46] Energy Efficiency of Inference Algorithms for Clinical Laboratory Data Sets: Green Artificial Intelligence Study
    Yu, Jia-Ruei
    Chen, Chun-Hsien
    Huang, Tsung-Wei
    Lu, Jang-Jih
    Chung, Chia-Ru
    Lin, Ting-Wei
    Wu, Min-Hsien
    Tseng, Yi-Ju
    Wang, Hsin-Yao
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH, 2022, 24 (01)
  • [47] Exploring Bias and Fairness in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Algorithms
    Khakurel, Utsab
    Abdelmoumin, Ghada
    Bajracharya, Aakriti
    Rawat, Danda B.
    ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND MACHINE LEARNING FOR MULTI-DOMAIN OPERATIONS APPLICATIONS IV, 2022, 12113
  • [48] Artificial Intelligence Algorithms, Bias, and Innovation: Implications for Social Work
    Kapur, Ishita
    Kennedy, Reeve
    Hickman, Christy
    JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE-BASED SOCIAL WORK, 2025,
  • [49] Bias, Fairness and Accountability with Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Algorithms
    Zhou, Nengfeng
    Zhang, Zach
    Nair, Vijayan N.
    Singhal, Harsh
    Chen, Jie
    INTERNATIONAL STATISTICAL REVIEW, 2022, 90 (03) : 468 - 480
  • [50] The application of artificial intelligence and data integration in COVID-19 studies: a scoping review
    Guo, Yi
    Zhang, Yahan
    Lyu, Tianchen
    Prosperi, Mattia
    Wang, Fei
    Xu, Hua
    Bian, Jiang
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, 2021, 28 (09) : 2050 - 2067