Charles E. Binkley, Joel M. Reynolds, Andrew G. Shuman
{"title":"Health AI poses distinct harms and potential benefits for disabled people","authors":"Charles E. Binkley, Joel M. Reynolds, Andrew G. Shuman","doi":"10.1038/s41591-024-03432-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Relative to other groups for whom the risk of bias in artificial intelligence (AI) has been identified, little attention has been given to the potential harms, and distinct benefits, that AI models could bring about for disabled people. Predictions made by AI models for disabled patients may lead to discrimination in at least three ways: disabled patients are underrepresented in datasets; they have historically been discriminated against in their medical care; and data used to predict physiological frailty may overestimate the degree of frailty for disabled patients.</p><p>The disability community is smaller than the general population, and most healthcare data on which AI models are being trained come from non-disabled patients. AI models trained on data primarily from non-disabled patients may accurately predict a given outcome for these patients but fail when applied to disabled patients. In addition, health data pertinent to disabled patients may be missing or incomplete. The potential for bias and discrimination attributable to underrepresentation and misrepresentation in datasets is well described<sup>1</sup>.</p>","PeriodicalId":19037,"journal":{"name":"Nature Medicine","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":58.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-024-03432-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Relative to other groups for whom the risk of bias in artificial intelligence (AI) has been identified, little attention has been given to the potential harms, and distinct benefits, that AI models could bring about for disabled people. Predictions made by AI models for disabled patients may lead to discrimination in at least three ways: disabled patients are underrepresented in datasets; they have historically been discriminated against in their medical care; and data used to predict physiological frailty may overestimate the degree of frailty for disabled patients.
The disability community is smaller than the general population, and most healthcare data on which AI models are being trained come from non-disabled patients. AI models trained on data primarily from non-disabled patients may accurately predict a given outcome for these patients but fail when applied to disabled patients. In addition, health data pertinent to disabled patients may be missing or incomplete. The potential for bias and discrimination attributable to underrepresentation and misrepresentation in datasets is well described1.
期刊介绍:
Nature Medicine is a monthly journal publishing original peer-reviewed research in all areas of medicine. The publication focuses on originality, timeliness, interdisciplinary interest, and the impact on improving human health. In addition to research articles, Nature Medicine also publishes commissioned content such as News, Reviews, and Perspectives. This content aims to provide context for the latest advances in translational and clinical research, reaching a wide audience of M.D. and Ph.D. readers. All editorial decisions for the journal are made by a team of full-time professional editors.
Nature Medicine consider all types of clinical research, including:
-Case-reports and small case series
-Clinical trials, whether phase 1, 2, 3 or 4
-Observational studies
-Meta-analyses
-Biomarker studies
-Public and global health studies
Nature Medicine is also committed to facilitating communication between translational and clinical researchers. As such, we consider “hybrid” studies with preclinical and translational findings reported alongside data from clinical studies.