Explaining medical AI performance disparities across sites with confounder Shapley value analysis
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Medical AI algorithms can often experience degraded performance when evaluated on previously unseen sites. Addressing cross-site performance disparities is key to ensuring that AI is equitable and effective when deployed on diverse patient populations. Multi-site evaluations are key to diagnosing such disparities as they can test algorithms across a broader range of potential biases such as patient demographics, equipment types, and technical parameters. However, such tests do not explain why the model performs worse. Our framework provides a method for quantifying the marginal and cumulative effect of each type of bias on the overall performance difference when a model is evaluated on external data. We demonstrate its usefulness in a case study of a deep learning model trained to detect the presence of pneumothorax, where our framework can help explain up to 60% of the discrepancy in performance across different sites with known biases like disease comorbidities and imaging parameters.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Nov 2021.
Builds on
11 of 23 references.
References · 11
- 2016Densely Connected Convolutional Networkscited by 6,720
- 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,917
- 2019CheXpert: A Large Chest Radiograph Dataset with Uncertainty Labels and Expert Comparisoncited by 1,423
- 2019Data Shapley: Equitable Valuation of Data for Machine Learningcited by 629
- 2019MIMIC-CXR-JPG, a large publicly available database of labeled chest radiographscited by 597
- 2019On instabilities of deep learning in image reconstruction - Does AI come at a cost?cited by 212
- 2021Reading Race: AI Recognises Patient's Racial Identity In Medical Imagescited by 156
- 2020CheXclusion: Fairness gaps in deep chest X-ray classifierscited by 153
- 2020A Distributional Framework for Data Valuationcited by 80
- 2019Understanding Bias in Machine Learningcited by 8
- 2020An Extensive Study on Cross-Dataset Bias and Evaluation Metrics Interpretation for Machine Learning applied to Gastrointestinal Tract Abnormality Classificationcited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 1; 2024: 2; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.
7 papers.
- 2022"Why did the Model Fail?": Attributing Model Performance Changes to Distribution Shiftscited by 18
- 2024A hierarchical decomposition for explaining ML performance discrepanciescited by 5
- 2024Regulating AI Adaptation: An Analysis of AI Medical Device Updatescited by 2
- 2022Robustness of an Artificial Intelligence Solution for Diagnosis of Normal Chest X-Rayscited by 1
- 2023Real-World Performance of Autonomously Reporting Normal Chest Radiographs in NHS Trusts Using a Deep-Learning Algorithm on the GP Pathwaycited by 1
- 2025"Who experiences large model decay and why?" A Hierarchical Framework for Diagnosing Heterogeneous Performance Driftcited by 1
- 2026Shapley Value Estimation for Multi-Site Data with Blockwise-Missing Featurescited by 0
- 2026Shapley Value Estimation for Multi-Site Data with Blockwise-Missing Features14 Sep 2026
- 2025"Who experiences large model decay and why?" A Hierarchical Framework for Diagnosing Heterogeneous Performance Drift31 May 2025
- 2024Regulating AI Adaptation: An Analysis of AI Medical Device Updates22 Jun 2024
- 2024A hierarchical decomposition for explaining ML performance discrepancies22 Feb 2024
- 2023Real-World Performance of Autonomously Reporting Normal Chest Radiographs in NHS Trusts Using a Deep-Learning Algorithm on the GP Pathway28 Jun 2023
- 2022"Why did the Model Fail?": Attributing Model Performance Changes to Distribution Shifts19 Oct 2022
- 2022Robustness of an Artificial Intelligence Solution for Diagnosis of Normal Chest X-Rays31 Aug 2022