Artificial Intelligence (AI) has the potential to revolutionize healthcare, but how do we assess whether a health AI system is truly reliable? When evaluating any health AI, it’s essential to consider several key factors: the level of evidence supporting it, the diversity of its training data, the transparency of the algorithm, and its inclusivity and compliance with standards.
1. Level of Evidence
The foundation of any good health AI is robust medical evidence. Which studies were used to develop the AI? Ideally, it should be based on high-quality research, such as randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or systematic reviews. Additionally, it’s important to ask: what studies have validated the AI? Validation often involves testing the AI on both known and unknown data sets, and its performance should be compared to ensure reliability.
2. Representation in Training Data
A health AI is only as good as the data it’s trained on. The algorithm’s training data must represent the patients it’s intended to serve. For example, if an AI is designed to assist in cardiology, it should include data from patients across different genders, ethnicities, and age groups. The origin of the data also matters—knowing where it came from and how it was gathered is essential for assessing its reliability.
3. Transparency in Data Handling
Transparency in how the data was prepared is critical. Was the data standardized? What happens if some information is missing? Any biases in the data—such as imbalanced gender representation or early dropouts from studies—can affect the AI’s performance. Therefore, understanding the quality and handling of training data is crucial.
4. Algorithm Functionality
Understanding how the algorithm works is another important factor. Does the AI account for sex- and gender-specific differences? Has it been tested to ensure accuracy across diverse patient groups? The AI’s decision-making process should be understandable. Key parameters and the model’s training process should be clearly explained to provide transparency on how it reaches its conclusions.
5. Validation Data
Validation data is essential in evaluating the performance of health AI. After development, the AI must be tested using independent data sets that were not part of its training. This process assesses how well the AI generalizes to new, unseen data—closely mimicking real-world applications. Proper validation ensures that the AI performs consistently and reliably across diverse patient groups, making it a critical step for verifying its real-world utility.
6. Inclusivity and Compliance
Health AI should be inclusive and accessible. This means that even non-experts should be able to understand its purpose and how to use it. The financial costs associated with the AI, for both healthcare providers and users, should also be communicated clearly. Finally, the AI must comply with relevant legal and ethical standards to ensure safety and fairness.
By carefully evaluating these aspects, we can ensure that health AI systems are effective, ethical, and equitable.
Key Takeaways:
- Evidence-based: The AI must be built on high-quality medical research.
- Representative Data: Training data should include diverse patient groups.
- Validation Data: AI must be tested on independent datasets to ensure real-world accuracy.
- Transparency: The algorithm must be understandable and account for gender-specific needs.
- Inclusive and Compliant: The AI should be easy to use and follow all legal standards.
For more Information
EQUAL CARE certifies medical intervention with a balanced gender representation in data and evidence. Join EQUAL CARE today and lead the health market with our certification. Together, we can set a new standard for healthcare excellence and create a future where everyone receives the care they deserve.
Let’s meet: https://calendly.com/thao_equalcare/30min
If you would like to find out more about the topics of gender-specific medicine and the related work of EQUAL CARE,
visit us on Instagram, X, LinkedIn or on our website www.equal-care.org.
Sources:
Benjamin T Dodsworth, Kelly Reeve, Lisa Falco, Tom Hueting, Behnam Sadeghirad, Lawrence Mbuagbaw, Nicolai Goettel, Nayeli Schmutz Gelsomino, Development and validation of an international preoperative risk assessment model for postoperative delirium, Age and Ageing, Volume 52, Issue 6, June 2023, afad086, https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afad086