Papers for

clinical policy makers

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Healthcare workers see bias in algorithms differently by their roles

Algorithmic Bias from the Perspectives of Healthcare Professionals

Abstract: This paper focuses on algorithmic bias of machine learning and artificial intelligence applications in healthcare information systems. Based on the quantitative data and qualitative comments from a survey and interviews with healthcare professionals, who have different job roles (e.g., clinical vs. administrative), this study provides findings about the relationships between algorithmic bias, perceived fairness, and the intended acceptance and adoption of ML algorithms and algorithm generated outcomes. The results suggest that the opinions of healthcare professionals toward the causes of algorithmic bias, the criteria of algorithm assessment, the perceived fairness, and bias mitigation approaches may vary depending on their job roles, perspectives, tasks, and the algorithm characteristics. More research is needed to investigate algorithmic bias to ensure fairness and equality in healthcare.

Tue 27 OctArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Algorithms used in healthcare can sometimes be unfair or biased. This paper looks at how different healthcare workers, like doctors and administrators, view these biases and fairness based on their job tasks. The authors found that opinions about why bias happens and how to judge and fix it vary depending on the person’s role and the specific algorithm. They suggest more research is needed to make sure these tools are fair and equal for everyone.
Open → 2610.38006v1