How Fair is Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare? – An Online Survey (Preprint)

Author:

Vorisek Carina NinaORCID,Stellmach CarolineORCID,Mayer Paula JosephineORCID,Klopfenstein Sophie Anne InesORCID,Bures Dominik Martin,Diehl Anke,Henningsen Maike,Ritter KerstinORCID,Thun SylviaORCID

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Resources are increasingly spent on artificial intelligence (AI) solutions for medical applications aiming to improve diagnosis, treatment and prevention of diseases. While the need for transparency and reduction of bias in data and algorithm development was addressed in past studies, little is known on active measures undertaken within current AI developments.

OBJECTIVE

This study’s objective was to survey AI specialists in healthcare to investigate developers’ perception of bias in AI algorithms for healthcare applications.

METHODS

An online survey was provided in both German and English language comprising a maximum of 41 questions using branching logic within the REDCap® web application. Only results of participants with experience in the field of medical AI applications were included for analysis. Demographic data, technical expertise and perception of fairness as well as knowledge in biases in AI were analyzed and variations among gender, age and work environment assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 151 AI specialists completed the online survey. The median age was 30 years (IQR 26-39) and 67% of respondents were male.  Five percent never heard of biases in AI before, one third rated their development as fair (31%, 47/151) or moderately fair (34%, 51/151). Twelve percent (18/151) reported their AI to be barely fair and 1% (2/151) not fair at all. Reasons for biases were lack of fair data (68%, 90/132), guidelines, recommendations (49%, 65/132) or knowledge (45%, 60/132). We found a significant difference among participants regarding bias perception and work environment (p=0.020): 5% of respondents working in industry compared to 25% of respondents working clinically rated their AI developments as not fair at all or barely fair.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights that knowledge and guidelines regarding preventive measures for biases as well as generating fair data with the help of the FAIR principles must be further perpetuated for establishing fair AI healthcare applications. The difference of fairness perception among AI developers from industry and clinical environment needs to be further investigated.

Publisher

JMIR Publications Inc.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3