OpenAlex · Aktualisierung stündlich · Letzte Aktualisierung: 12.05.2026, 20:52

Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.

Inherent Bias in Electronic Health Records: A Scoping Review of Sources of Bias

2024·27 Zitationen·medRxivOpen Access
Volltext beim Verlag öffnen

27

Zitationen

7

Autoren

2024

Jahr

Abstract

Objectives: 1.1Biases inherent in electronic health records (EHRs), and therefore in medical artificial intelligence (AI) models may significantly exacerbate health inequities and challenge the adoption of ethical and responsible AI in healthcare. Biases arise from multiple sources, some of which are not as documented in the literature. Biases are encoded in how the data has been collected and labeled, by implicit and unconscious biases of clinicians, or by the tools used for data processing. These biases and their encoding in healthcare records undermine the reliability of such data and bias clinical judgments and medical outcomes. Moreover, when healthcare records are used to build data-driven solutions, the biases are further exacerbated, resulting in systems that perpetuate biases and induce healthcare disparities. This literature scoping review aims to categorize the main sources of biases inherent in EHRs. Methods: 1.2We queried PubMed and Web of Science on January 19th, 2023, for peer-reviewed sources in English, published between 2016 and 2023, using the PRISMA approach to stepwise scoping of the literature. To select the papers that empirically analyze bias in EHR, from the initial yield of 430 papers, 27 duplicates were removed, and 403 studies were screened for eligibility. 196 articles were removed after the title and abstract screening, and 96 articles were excluded after the full-text review resulting in a final selection of 116 articles. Results: induced by c) implicit clinician bias, d) referral and admission bias; e) diagnosis or risk disparities bias and finally, (f) biases in machinery and algorithms. Conclusions: prove the causality. Our review shows that data-, human- and machine biases are prevalent in healthcare and they significantly impact healthcare outcomes and judgments and exacerbate disparities and differential treatment. Understanding how diverse biases affect AI systems and recommendations is critical. We suggest that researchers and medical personnel should develop safeguards and adopt data-driven solutions with a "bias-in-mind" approach. More empirical evidence is needed to tease out the effects of different sources of bias on health outcomes.

Ähnliche Arbeiten