Challenges in Medical Algorithmic Fairness

Clicks: 5
ID: 325122
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #40 of 51 articles by views in jnci cancer spectrum

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being integrated into oncology for applications including cancer detection, risk stratification, treatment planning, and clinical documentation. Concerningly, growing evidence demonstrates that AI systems can reproduce or amplify existing disparities across patient populations. Although considerable effort has focused on developing computational methods to reduce algorithmic bias, many challenges surrounding fairness extend beyond technical implementation. In this commentary, we examine algorithmic fairness in oncology from both technical and normative perspectives. We review common sources of bias throughout the machine learning pipeline, discuss major statistical definitions of fairness, including demographic parity, calibration, and equalized odds, and highlight the inherent trade-offs among these metrics. We further explore how fairness often conflicts with overall predictive performance, arguing that model selection inevitably reflects ethical judgments rather than purely technical optimization. We discuss the limitations of current bias mitigation strategies and contend that many disparities rooted in historical and structural inequities cannot be resolved through algorithmic interventions alone. Finally, we outline priorities for the responsible development and deployment of clinical AI, including greater transparency in fairness decisions, context-specific evaluation standards, ongoing post-deployment auditing, and stronger regulatory oversight. Achieving equitable AI in oncology will require coordinated efforts among developers, clinicians, regulators, and patients to ensure that these technologies improve outcomes without perpetuating existing inequities.
Reference Key
openalex_W7203625357 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Anand Srinivasan, Durga V Sritharan, Sanjay Aneja, Ilana B. Richman
Journal jnci cancer spectrum
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/jncics/pkag081
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pkag081
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.