Responsible AI for Acute Stroke Management.

IF 11.1 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Stroke Pub Date : 2026-11-01 Epub Date: 2026-09-17 DOI:10.1161/STROKEAHA.126.053795
Joanna Lin, Mumu Aktar, Hakim Baazaoui, Susanne Wegener, Roberto Souza, Leticia Rittner, Johanna Ospel, Mariana Bento
{"title":"Responsible AI for Acute Stroke Management.","authors":"Joanna Lin, Mumu Aktar, Hakim Baazaoui, Susanne Wegener, Roberto Souza, Leticia Rittner, Johanna Ospel, Mariana Bento","doi":"10.1161/STROKEAHA.126.053795","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Artificial intelligence is increasingly integrated into acute stroke management, demonstrating strong performance in tasks such as large vessel occlusion detection, Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score scoring, and functional outcome prediction. However, concerns persist regarding both the black-box nature of these models and algorithmic bias that may exacerbate disparities in stroke incidence, treatment, and outcomes across racial and socioeconomic subgroups. This review synthesizes the current literature on explainable artificial intelligence and fairness in artificial intelligence applications for acute stroke management, identifies persistent challenges, and outlines recommendations for the development of equitable and trustworthy systems in stroke care. Recent studies have increasingly adopted post hoc explainability methods, though these are limited by approximation and misleading interpretations, especially since explanations are rarely formally tested. Explainability and fairness remain largely disconnected, with fairness evaluation remaining uncommon due to limited demographic metadata, regulatory constraints, and the absence of stroke-specific fairness criteria. Generalizability also remains a concern due to suboptimal data set partitioning strategies and inadequate reporting practices. Responsible artificial intelligence for acute stroke management requires unified evaluation frameworks that jointly assess explainability, fairness, and generalizability.</p>","PeriodicalId":21989,"journal":{"name":"Stroke","volume":" ","pages":"3441-3450"},"PeriodicalIF":11.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stroke","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.126.053795","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/9/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Artificial intelligence is increasingly integrated into acute stroke management, demonstrating strong performance in tasks such as large vessel occlusion detection, Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score scoring, and functional outcome prediction. However, concerns persist regarding both the black-box nature of these models and algorithmic bias that may exacerbate disparities in stroke incidence, treatment, and outcomes across racial and socioeconomic subgroups. This review synthesizes the current literature on explainable artificial intelligence and fairness in artificial intelligence applications for acute stroke management, identifies persistent challenges, and outlines recommendations for the development of equitable and trustworthy systems in stroke care. Recent studies have increasingly adopted post hoc explainability methods, though these are limited by approximation and misleading interpretations, especially since explanations are rarely formally tested. Explainability and fairness remain largely disconnected, with fairness evaluation remaining uncommon due to limited demographic metadata, regulatory constraints, and the absence of stroke-specific fairness criteria. Generalizability also remains a concern due to suboptimal data set partitioning strategies and inadequate reporting practices. Responsible artificial intelligence for acute stroke management requires unified evaluation frameworks that jointly assess explainability, fairness, and generalizability.

负责急性中风管理的人工智能。
人工智能越来越多地融入急性中风管理,在大血管闭塞检测、阿尔伯塔中风项目早期计算机断层扫描评分和功能结果预测等任务中表现出强大的性能。然而,对这些模型的黑箱性质和算法偏差的担忧仍然存在,这可能会加剧不同种族和社会经济亚群体在中风发病率、治疗和结果方面的差异。本综述综合了目前关于急性卒中管理中可解释的人工智能和人工智能应用公平性的文献,确定了持续存在的挑战,并概述了卒中护理中公平可信系统的发展建议。最近的研究越来越多地采用事后可解释性方法,尽管这些方法受到近似和误导性解释的限制,特别是因为解释很少经过正式测试。可解释性和公平性在很大程度上仍然是脱节的,由于有限的人口统计元数据、监管约束和缺乏针对中风的公平性标准,公平性评估仍然不常见。由于次优的数据集划分策略和不充分的报告实践,泛化性仍然是一个问题。负责任的急性卒中管理人工智能需要统一的评估框架,共同评估可解释性、公平性和概括性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Stroke
Stroke 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
13.40
自引率
6.00%
发文量
2021
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Stroke is a monthly publication that collates reports of clinical and basic investigation of any aspect of the cerebral circulation and its diseases. The publication covers a wide range of disciplines including anesthesiology, critical care medicine, epidemiology, internal medicine, neurology, neuro-ophthalmology, neuropathology, neuropsychology, neurosurgery, nuclear medicine, nursing, radiology, rehabilitation, speech pathology, vascular physiology, and vascular surgery. The audience of Stroke includes neurologists, basic scientists, cardiologists, vascular surgeons, internists, interventionalists, neurosurgeons, nurses, and physiatrists. Stroke is indexed in Biological Abstracts, BIOSIS, CAB Abstracts, Chemical Abstracts, CINAHL, Current Contents, Embase, MEDLINE, and Science Citation Index Expanded.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书