Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
FairMedFM: Fairness Benchmarking for Medical Imaging Foundation Models
4
Zitationen
7
Autoren
2024
Jahr
Abstract
The advent of foundation models (FMs) in healthcare offers unprecedented opportunities to enhance medical diagnostics through automated classification and segmentation tasks. However, these models also raise significant concerns about their fairness, especially when applied to diverse and underrepresented populations in healthcare applications. Currently, there is a lack of comprehensive benchmarks, standardized pipelines, and easily adaptable libraries to evaluate and understand the fairness performance of FMs in medical imaging, leading to considerable challenges in formulating and implementing solutions that ensure equitable outcomes across diverse patient populations. To fill this gap, we introduce FairMedFM, a fairness benchmark for FM research in medical imaging.FairMedFM integrates with 17 popular medical imaging datasets, encompassing different modalities, dimensionalities, and sensitive attributes. It explores 20 widely used FMs, with various usages such as zero-shot learning, linear probing, parameter-efficient fine-tuning, and prompting in various downstream tasks -- classification and segmentation. Our exhaustive analysis evaluates the fairness performance over different evaluation metrics from multiple perspectives, revealing the existence of bias, varied utility-fairness trade-offs on different FMs, consistent disparities on the same datasets regardless FMs, and limited effectiveness of existing unfairness mitigation methods. Checkout FairMedFM's project page and open-sourced codebase, which supports extendible functionalities and applications as well as inclusive for studies on FMs in medical imaging over the long term.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
1986 · 38.753 Zit.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
2009 · 37.550 Zit.
PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation
2018 · 37.186 Zit.
The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
2011 · 33.482 Zit.
RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
2019 · 28.378 Zit.