Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021 Feb 10;12(1):13.
doi: 10.1186/s13244-020-00955-7.

Not all biases are bad: equitable and inequitable biases in machine learning and radiology

Affiliations
Review

Not all biases are bad: equitable and inequitable biases in machine learning and radiology

Mirjam Pot et al. Insights Imaging. .

Abstract

The application of machine learning (ML) technologies in medicine generally but also in radiology more specifically is hoped to improve clinical processes and the provision of healthcare. A central motivation in this regard is to advance patient treatment by reducing human error and increasing the accuracy of prognosis, diagnosis and therapy decisions. There is, however, also increasing awareness about bias in ML technologies and its potentially harmful consequences. Biases refer to systematic distortions of datasets, algorithms, or human decision making. These systematic distortions are understood to have negative effects on the quality of an outcome in terms of accuracy, fairness, or transparency. But biases are not only a technical problem that requires a technical solution. Because they often also have a social dimension, the 'distorted' outcomes they yield often have implications for equity. This paper assesses different types of biases that can emerge within applications of ML in radiology, and discusses in what cases such biases are problematic. Drawing upon theories of equity in healthcare, we argue that while some biases are harmful and should be acted upon, others might be unproblematic and even desirable-exactly because they can contribute to overcome inequities.

Keywords: Bias; Equity; Ethics; Machine learning; Radiology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Mirjam Pot and Barbara Prainsack have no competing interests. Nathalie Kieusseyan’s conflict of interest is her employment with a commercial company, as indicated in her affiliation.

References

    1. Choy G, Khalilzadeh O, Michalski M, et al. Current applications and future impact of machine learning in radiology. Radiology. 2018;288(2):318–328. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018171820. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ristevski B, Chen M. Big data analytics in medicine and healthcare. J Integr Bioinform. 2018;1:1. doi: 10.1515/jib-2017-0030. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Grace K, Salvatier J, Dafoe A, Zhang B, Evans O. When will AI exceed human performance? Evidence from AI experts. J Artif Intell Res. 2018;62:729–754. doi: 10.1613/jair.1.11222. - DOI
    1. Rajpurkar P, Irvin J, Ball RL, et al. Deep learning for chest radiograph diagnosis: a retrospective comparison of the CheXNeXt algorithm to practicing radiologists. PLOS Med. 2018;1:1. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002686. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. European Society of Radiology Impact of artificial intelligence on radiology: a EuroAIM survey among members of the European Society of Radiology. Insights Imaging. 2019;1:1. doi: 10.1186/s13244-019-0798-3. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources