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
. 2024 Nov 11;28(1):363.
doi: 10.1186/s13054-024-05134-4.

Representation of intensivists' race/ethnicity, sex, and age by artificial intelligence: a cross-sectional study of two text-to-image models

Mia Gisselbaek  1 , Mélanie Suppan  1 , Laurens Minsart  2 , Ekin Köselerli  3 , Sheila Nainan Myatra  4 , Idit Matot  5 , Odmara L Barreto Chang  6 , Sarah Saxena #  7 , Joana Berger-Estilita #  8   9   10   11
Affiliations

Representation of intensivists' race/ethnicity, sex, and age by artificial intelligence: a cross-sectional study of two text-to-image models

Mia Gisselbaek et al. Crit Care. .

Abstract

Background: Integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into intensive care practices can enhance patient care by providing real-time predictions and aiding clinical decisions. However, biases in AI models can undermine diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts, particularly in visual representations of healthcare professionals. This work aims to examine the demographic representation of two AI text-to-image models, Midjourney and ChatGPT DALL-E 2, and assess their accuracy in depicting the demographic characteristics of intensivists.

Methods: This cross-sectional study, conducted from May to July 2024, used demographic data from the USA workforce report (2022) and intensive care trainees (2021) to compare real-world intensivist demographics with images generated by two AI models, Midjourney v6.0 and ChatGPT 4.0 DALL-E 2. A total of 1,400 images were generated across ICU subspecialties, with outcomes being the comparison of sex, race/ethnicity, and age representation in AI-generated images to the actual workforce demographics.

Results: The AI models demonstrated noticeable biases when compared to the actual U.S. intensive care workforce data, notably overrepresenting White and young doctors. ChatGPT-DALL-E2 produced less female (17.3% vs 32.2%, p < 0.0001), more White (61% vs 55.1%, p = 0.002) and younger (53.3% vs 23.9%, p < 0.001) individuals. While Midjourney depicted more female (47.6% vs 32.2%, p < 0.001), more White (60.9% vs 55.1%, p = 0.003) and younger intensivist (49.3% vs 23.9%, p < 0.001). Substantial differences between the specialties within both models were observed. Finally when compared together, both models showed significant differences in the Portrayal of intensivists.

Conclusions: Significant biases in AI images of intensivists generated by ChatGPT DALL-E 2 and Midjourney reflect broader cultural issues, potentially perpetuating stereotypes of healthcare worker within the society. This study highlights the need for an approach that ensures fairness, accountability, transparency, and ethics in AI applications for healthcare.

Keywords: Artificial intelligence (AI); Bias; Demographic representation; Equity and inclusion (DEI); Intensive care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate On April 16, 2024, an ethical committee waiver (Req-2024-00531) was obtained from the Swissethics—University of Bern, Switzerland. The researchers followed the Data Protection Acts and the study complied with the Declaration of Helsinki [37]. The study adhered to the strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) reporting guideline. [38] Consent for publication Not applicable. Competing interests OB received funding from the Harold Amos Medical Faculty Development Program and participated as an investigator for the clinical trial OLIVER from Medtronic®. SS has received speaker’s fees from Medtronic®/Merck®. JB-E is a member of the European Society of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) Board of Directors and has received speaker fees from Medtronic®. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Proportion of female characters in each dimension. HOD: head of department
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Proportion of White characters in each dimension. HOD: head of department
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Typical AI depictions of different categories
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Bellman R. An introduction to artificial intelligence: Can computers think? San Francisco: Boyd & Fraser Publishing Company; 1978. p. 169.
    1. Hoffman S. The Emerging Hazard of AI-Related Health Care Discrimination. Hastings Cent Rep. 2021;51(1):8–9. - PubMed
    1. Topol EJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):44–56. - PubMed
    1. Cecconi M, Greco M, Shickel B, Vincent JL, Bihorac A. Artificial intelligence in acute medicine: a call to action. Crit Care. 2024;28(1):258. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Yoon JH, Pinsky MR, Clermont G. Artificial intelligence in critical care medicine. Crit Care. 2022;26(1):75. - PMC - PubMed