Search

Artificial intelligence (AI) offers opportunities but also challenges for biomedical research and healthcare. This position paper shares the results of the international conference "Fair medicine and AI" (online 3–5 March 2021). Scholars from science and technology studies (STS), gender studies, and ethics of science and technology formulated opportunities, challenges, and research and development desiderata for AI in healthcare. AI systems and solutions, which are being rapidly developed and applied, may have undesirable and unintended consequences including the risk of perpetuating health inequalities for marginalized groups. Socially robust development and implications of AI in healthcare require urgent investigation. There is a particular dearth of studies in human-AI interaction and how this may best be configured to dependably deliver safe, effective and equitable healthcare. To address these challenges, we need to establish diverse and interdisciplinary teams equipped to develop and apply medical AI in a fair, accountable and transparent manner. We formulate the importance of including social science perspectives in the development of intersectionally beneficent and equitable AI for biomedical research and healthcare, in part by strengthening AI health evaluation. • Bias, discrimination and structural injustice for medical AI are an overlooked issue. • AI for biomedical research and healthcare should be beneficent and equitable. • Social science perspectives within AI for medicine development are essential. • Challenges are multifold and an agenda for future research is needed. • Qualitative, ethnographic and participatory approaches could help provide fairer AI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medical use cases for machine learning (ML) are growing exponentially. The first hospitals are already using ML systems as decision support systems in their daily routine. At the same time, most ML systems are still opaque and it is not clear how these systems arrive at their predictions. In this paper, we provide a brief overview of the taxonomy of explainability methods and review popular methods. In addition, we conduct a systematic literature search on PubMed to investigate which explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) methods are used in 450 specific medical supervised ML use cases, how the use of XAI methods has emerged recently, and how the precision of describing ML pipelines has evolved over the past 20 years. A large fraction of publications with ML use cases do not use XAI methods at all to explain ML predictions. However, when XAI methods are used, open-source and model-agnostic explanation methods are more commonly used, with SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) and Gradient Class Activation Mapping (Grad-CAM) for tabular and image data leading the way. ML pipelines have been described in increasing detail and uniformity in recent years. However, the willingness to share data and code has stagnated at about one-quarter. XAI methods are mainly used when their application requires little effort. The homogenization of reports in ML use cases facilitates the comparability of work and should be advanced in the coming years. Experts who can mediate between the worlds of informatics and medicine will become more and more in demand when using ML systems due to the high complexity of the domain. [Display omitted] • We estimate that only 16 % of the reported explainability methods could be understood by patients. • The distribution of data types for explainable ML applications for tabular | image | text | audio data is 51 % | 32 % | 3 % | 0 %. • The quality of the description of machine learning pipelines increased in recent years with more homogeneity. • The data and code sharing ratio stagnated in about one quarter. • Most popular explainability methods are SHAP, LIME, and Grad-CAM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]