{"title":"实验室数据是医疗人工智能和机器学习模型偏差的潜在来源。","authors":"Hung S Luu","doi":"10.3343/alm.2024.0323","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are anticipated to transform the practice of medicine. As one of the largest sources of digital data in healthcare, laboratory results can strongly influence AI and ML algorithms that require large sets of healthcare data for training. Embedded bias introduced into AI and ML models not only has disastrous consequences for quality of care but also may perpetuate and exacerbate health disparities. The lack of test harmonization, which is defined as the ability to produce comparable results and the same interpretation irrespective of the method or instrument platform used to produce the result, may introduce aggregation bias into algorithms with potential adverse outcomes for patients. Limited interoperability of laboratory results at the technical, syntactic, semantic, and organizational levels is a source of embedded bias that limits the accuracy and generalizability of algorithmic models. Population-specific issues, such as inadequate representation in clinical trials and inaccurate race attribution, not only affect the interpretation of laboratory results but also may perpetuate erroneous conclusions based on AI and ML models in the healthcare literature.","PeriodicalId":8421,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Laboratory Medicine","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Laboratory Data as a Potential Source of Bias in Healthcare Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Models.\",\"authors\":\"Hung S Luu\",\"doi\":\"10.3343/alm.2024.0323\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are anticipated to transform the practice of medicine. As one of the largest sources of digital data in healthcare, laboratory results can strongly influence AI and ML algorithms that require large sets of healthcare data for training. Embedded bias introduced into AI and ML models not only has disastrous consequences for quality of care but also may perpetuate and exacerbate health disparities. The lack of test harmonization, which is defined as the ability to produce comparable results and the same interpretation irrespective of the method or instrument platform used to produce the result, may introduce aggregation bias into algorithms with potential adverse outcomes for patients. Limited interoperability of laboratory results at the technical, syntactic, semantic, and organizational levels is a source of embedded bias that limits the accuracy and generalizability of algorithmic models. Population-specific issues, such as inadequate representation in clinical trials and inaccurate race attribution, not only affect the interpretation of laboratory results but also may perpetuate erroneous conclusions based on AI and ML models in the healthcare literature.\",\"PeriodicalId\":8421,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Laboratory Medicine\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Laboratory Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3343/alm.2024.0323\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Laboratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3343/alm.2024.0323","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
人工智能(AI)和机器学习(ML)有望改变医疗实践。作为医疗领域最大的数字数据来源之一,实验室结果会对需要大量医疗数据集进行训练的人工智能和人工智能算法产生重大影响。人工智能和人工智能模型中植入的偏见不仅会对医疗质量造成灾难性后果,还可能延续和加剧健康差距。缺乏检测协调性(即无论使用哪种方法或仪器平台得出结果,都能得出可比结果和相同的解释)可能会在算法中引入聚集偏差,从而给患者带来潜在的不良后果。实验室结果在技术、语法、语义和组织层面上的互操作性有限,是造成嵌入式偏差的一个原因,从而限制了算法模型的准确性和可推广性。特定人群的问题,如临床试验中的代表性不足和不准确的种族归属,不仅会影响实验室结果的解释,还可能使医疗文献中基于人工智能和 ML 模型的错误结论长期存在。
Laboratory Data as a Potential Source of Bias in Healthcare Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Models.
Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are anticipated to transform the practice of medicine. As one of the largest sources of digital data in healthcare, laboratory results can strongly influence AI and ML algorithms that require large sets of healthcare data for training. Embedded bias introduced into AI and ML models not only has disastrous consequences for quality of care but also may perpetuate and exacerbate health disparities. The lack of test harmonization, which is defined as the ability to produce comparable results and the same interpretation irrespective of the method or instrument platform used to produce the result, may introduce aggregation bias into algorithms with potential adverse outcomes for patients. Limited interoperability of laboratory results at the technical, syntactic, semantic, and organizational levels is a source of embedded bias that limits the accuracy and generalizability of algorithmic models. Population-specific issues, such as inadequate representation in clinical trials and inaccurate race attribution, not only affect the interpretation of laboratory results but also may perpetuate erroneous conclusions based on AI and ML models in the healthcare literature.
期刊介绍:
Annals of Laboratory Medicine is the official journal of Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine. The journal title has been recently changed from the Korean Journal of Laboratory Medicine (ISSN, 1598-6535) from the January issue of 2012. The JCR 2017 Impact factor of Ann Lab Med was 1.916.