Generative models improve fairness of medical classifiers under distribution shifts.

Domain generalization is a ubiquitous challenge for machine learning in healthcare. Model performance in real-world conditions might be lower than expected because of discrepancies between the data encountered during deployment and development. Underrepresentation of some groups or conditions during model development is a common cause of this phenomenon. This challenge is often not readily addressed by targeted data acquisition and 'labeling' by expert clinicians, which can be prohibitively expensive or practically impossible because of the rarity of conditions or the available clinical expertise. We hypothesize that advances in generative artificial intelligence can help mitigate this unmet need in a steerable fashion, enriching our training dataset with synthetic examples that address shortfalls of underrepresented conditions or subgroups. We show that diffusion models can automatically learn realistic augmentations from data in a label-efficient manner. We demonstrate that learned augmentations make models more robust and statistically fair in-distribution and out of distribution. To evaluate the generality of our approach, we studied three distinct medical imaging contexts of varying difficulty: (1) histopathology, (2) chest X-ray and (3) dermatology images. Complementing real samples with synthetic ones improved the robustness of models in all three medical tasks and increased fairness by improving the accuracy of clinical diagnosis within underrepresented groups, especially out of distribution.

An intentional approach to managing bias in general purpose embedding models.

Advances in machine learning for health care have brought concerns about bias from the research community; specifically, the introduction, perpetuation, or exacerbation of care disparities. Reinforcing these concerns is the finding that medical images often reveal signals about sensitive attributes in ways that are hard to pinpoint by both algorithms and people. This finding raises a question about how to best design general purpose pretrained embeddings (GPPEs, defined as embeddings meant to support a broad array of use cases) for building downstream models that are free from particular types of bias. The downstream model should be carefully evaluated for bias, and audited and improved as appropriate. However, in our view, well intentioned attempts to prevent the upstream components-GPPEs-from learning sensitive attributes can have unintended consequences on the downstream models. Despite producing a veneer of technical neutrality, the resultant end-to-end system might still be biased or poorly performing. We present reasons, by building on previously published data, to support the reasoning that GPPEs should ideally contain as much information as the original data contain, and highlight the perils of trying to remove sensitive attributes from a GPPE. We also emphasise that downstream prediction models trained for specific tasks and settings, whether developed using GPPEs or not, should be carefully designed and evaluated to avoid bias that makes models vulnerable to issues such as distributional shift. These evaluations should be done by a diverse team, including social scientists, on a diverse cohort representing the full breadth of the patient population for which the final model is intended.