SynthesisApplied clinical informatics2022
Diversity in Machine Learning: A Systematic Review of Text-Based Diagnostic Applications.
Synthesis in Applied clinical informatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reporting of race and ethnicity in studies of artificial intelligence in pediatric urology A secondary analysis of the AI-PEDURO online repository.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2026Review
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveAs the storage of clinical data has transitioned into electronic formats, medical informatics has become increasingly relevant in providing diagnostic aid. The purpose of this review is to evaluate machine learning models that use text data for diagnosis and to assess the diversity of the included study populations.
methodsWe conducted a systematic literature review on three public databases. Two authors reviewed every abstract for inclusion. Articles were included if they used or developed machine learning algorithms to aid in diagnosis. Articles focusing on imaging informatics were excluded.
resultsFrom 2,260 identified papers, we included 78. Of the machine learning models used, neural networks were relied upon most frequently (44.9%). Studies had a median population of 661.5 patients, and diseases and disorders of 10 different body systems were studied. Of the 35.9% ( DISCUSSION: With the power to build robust algorithms supported by massive quantities of clinical data, machine learning is shaping the future of diagnostics. Limitations of the underlying data create potential biases, especially if patient demographics are unknown or not included in the training.
conclusionAs the movement toward clinical reliance on machine learning accelerates, both recording demographic information and using diverse training sets should be emphasized. Extrapolating algorithms to demographics beyond the original study population leaves large gaps for potential biases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.