Mahmud Omar, Vera Sorin, Reem Agbareia, Donald U Apakama, Ali Soroush, Ankit Sakhuja, Robert Freeman, Carol R Horowitz, Lynne D Richardson, Girish N Nadkarni, Eyal Klang
{"title":"Evaluating and addressing demographic disparities in medical large language models: a systematic review.","authors":"Mahmud Omar, Vera Sorin, Reem Agbareia, Donald U Apakama, Ali Soroush, Ankit Sakhuja, Robert Freeman, Carol R Horowitz, Lynne D Richardson, Girish N Nadkarni, Eyal Klang","doi":"10.1186/s12939-025-02419-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Large language models are increasingly evaluated for use in healthcare. However, concerns about their impact on disparities persist. This study reviews current research on demographic biases in large language models to identify prevalent bias types, assess measurement methods, and evaluate mitigation strategies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review, searching publications from January 2018 to July 2024 across five databases. We included peer-reviewed studies evaluating demographic biases in large language models, focusing on gender, race, ethnicity, age, and other factors. Study quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tools.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our review included 24 studies. Of these, 22 (91.7%) identified biases. Gender bias was the most prevalent, reported in 15 of 16 studies (93.7%). Racial or ethnic biases were observed in 10 of 11 studies (90.9%). Only two studies found minimal or no bias in certain contexts. Mitigation strategies mainly included prompt engineering, with varying effectiveness. However, these findings are tempered by a potential publication bias, as studies with negative results are less frequently published.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Biases are observed in large language models across various medical domains. While bias detection is improving, effective mitigation strategies are still developing. As LLMs increasingly influence critical decisions, addressing these biases and their resultant disparities is essential for ensuring fair artificial intelligence systems. Future research should focus on a wider range of demographic factors, intersectional analyses, and non-Western cultural contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":13745,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Equity in Health","volume":"24 1","pages":"57"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11866893/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for Equity in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-025-02419-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Large language models are increasingly evaluated for use in healthcare. However, concerns about their impact on disparities persist. This study reviews current research on demographic biases in large language models to identify prevalent bias types, assess measurement methods, and evaluate mitigation strategies.
Methods: We conducted a systematic review, searching publications from January 2018 to July 2024 across five databases. We included peer-reviewed studies evaluating demographic biases in large language models, focusing on gender, race, ethnicity, age, and other factors. Study quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tools.
Results: Our review included 24 studies. Of these, 22 (91.7%) identified biases. Gender bias was the most prevalent, reported in 15 of 16 studies (93.7%). Racial or ethnic biases were observed in 10 of 11 studies (90.9%). Only two studies found minimal or no bias in certain contexts. Mitigation strategies mainly included prompt engineering, with varying effectiveness. However, these findings are tempered by a potential publication bias, as studies with negative results are less frequently published.
Conclusion: Biases are observed in large language models across various medical domains. While bias detection is improving, effective mitigation strategies are still developing. As LLMs increasingly influence critical decisions, addressing these biases and their resultant disparities is essential for ensuring fair artificial intelligence systems. Future research should focus on a wider range of demographic factors, intersectional analyses, and non-Western cultural contexts.
期刊介绍:
International Journal for Equity in Health is an Open Access, peer-reviewed, online journal presenting evidence relevant to the search for, and attainment of, equity in health across and within countries. International Journal for Equity in Health aims to improve the understanding of issues that influence the health of populations. This includes the discussion of political, policy-related, economic, social and health services-related influences, particularly with regard to systematic differences in distributions of one or more aspects of health in population groups defined demographically, geographically, or socially.