Cargando…
Not all biases are bad: equitable and inequitable biases in machine learning and radiology
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 a...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7872878/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33564955 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13244-020-00955-7 |
_version_ | 1783649274858307584 |
---|---|
author | Pot, Mirjam Kieusseyan, Nathalie Prainsack, Barbara |
author_facet | Pot, Mirjam Kieusseyan, Nathalie Prainsack, Barbara |
author_sort | Pot, Mirjam |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7872878 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78728782021-02-10 Not all biases are bad: equitable and inequitable biases in machine learning and radiology Pot, Mirjam Kieusseyan, Nathalie Prainsack, Barbara Insights Imaging Critical Review 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. Springer International Publishing 2021-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7872878/ /pubmed/33564955 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13244-020-00955-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Critical Review Pot, Mirjam Kieusseyan, Nathalie Prainsack, Barbara Not all biases are bad: equitable and inequitable biases in machine learning and radiology |
title | Not all biases are bad: equitable and inequitable biases in machine learning and radiology |
title_full | Not all biases are bad: equitable and inequitable biases in machine learning and radiology |
title_fullStr | Not all biases are bad: equitable and inequitable biases in machine learning and radiology |
title_full_unstemmed | Not all biases are bad: equitable and inequitable biases in machine learning and radiology |
title_short | Not all biases are bad: equitable and inequitable biases in machine learning and radiology |
title_sort | not all biases are bad: equitable and inequitable biases in machine learning and radiology |
topic | Critical Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7872878/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33564955 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13244-020-00955-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT potmirjam notallbiasesarebadequitableandinequitablebiasesinmachinelearningandradiology AT kieusseyannathalie notallbiasesarebadequitableandinequitablebiasesinmachinelearningandradiology AT prainsackbarbara notallbiasesarebadequitableandinequitablebiasesinmachinelearningandradiology |