Evaluating and addressing demographic disparities in medical large language models: a systematic review.

IF 4.5 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH International Journal for Equity in Health Pub Date : 2025-02-26 DOI:10.1186/s12939-025-02419-0
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.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
4.20%
发文量
162
审稿时长
28 weeks
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.
期刊最新文献
Effect of universal health insurance implementation on beneficiaries' evaluation of public health facilities in Egypt - a cross-sectional study. The impact of interprofessional collaboration between pharmacists and community health workers on medication adherence: a systematic review. Evaluating and addressing demographic disparities in medical large language models: a systematic review. Rare disease challenges and potential actions in the Middle East. "I would be very proud to be part of an initiative that didn't exclude people because it was hard": mapping and contextualising health equity responsibilities and decision-making tensions in the implementation of a multi-level system reform initiative.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1