mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

The METRIC-framework for assessing data quality for trustworthy AI in medicine: a systematic review

arXiv 2402.13635 ↗First posted 21 Feb 2024cs.LG cs.AIcited by 13

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The adoption of machine learning (ML) and, more specifically, deep learning (DL) applications into all major areas of our lives is underway. The development of trustworthy AI is especially important in medicine due to the large implications for patients' lives. While trustworthiness concerns various aspects including ethical, technical and privacy requirements, we focus on the importance of data quality (training/test) in DL. Since data quality dictates the behaviour of ML products, evaluating data quality will play a key part in the regulatory approval of medical AI products. We perform a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines using the databases PubMed and ACM Digital Library. We identify 2362 studies, out of which 62 records fulfil our eligibility criteria. From this literature, we synthesise the existing knowledge on data quality frameworks and combine it with the perspective of ML applications in medicine. As a result, we propose the METRIC-framework, a specialised data quality framework for medical training data comprising 15 awareness dimensions, along which developers of medical ML applications should investigate a dataset. This knowledge helps to reduce biases as a major source of unfairness, increase robustness, facilitate interpretability and thus lays the foundation for trustworthy AI in medicine. Incorporating such systematic assessment of medical datasets into regulatory approval processes has the potential to accelerate the approval of ML products and builds the basis for new standards.

Key facts. Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 53 of its 238 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Feb 2024.

Builds on

53 of 238 references.

References · 53

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  3. 2015U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentationcited by 19,604
  4. 2021High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion Modelscited by 18,694
  5. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
  6. 2015You Only Look Once: Unified, Real-Time Object Detectioncited by 4,829
  7. 2017Fashion-MNIST: a Novel Image Dataset for Benchmarking Machine Learning Algorithmscited by 4,283
  8. 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
  9. 2021TransUNet: Transformers Make Strong Encoders for Medical Image Segmentationcited by 1,552
  10. 2018Datasheets for Datasetscited by 1,371
  11. 2019Can You Trust Your Model's Uncertainty? Evaluating Predictive Uncertainty Under Dataset Shiftcited by 1,274
  12. 2017SmoothGrad: removing noise by adding noisecited by 1,097
38 more
  1. 2018Model Cards for Model Reportingcited by 1,068
  2. 2017Revisiting Unreasonable Effectiveness of Data in Deep Learning Eracited by 916
  3. 2022Swin UNETR: Swin Transformers for Semantic Segmentation of Brain Tumors in MRI Imagescited by 823
  4. 2016Recurrent Neural Networks for Multivariate Time Series with Missing Valuescited by 548
  5. 2017A systematic study of the class imbalance problem in convolutional neural networkscited by 510
  6. 2017Men Also Like Shopping: Reducing Gender Bias Amplification using Corpus-level Constraintscited by 420
  7. 2019Confident Learning: Estimating Uncertainty in Dataset Labelscited by 411
  8. 2021A Survey of Data Augmentation Approaches for NLPcited by 408
  9. 2018Learning Not to Learn: Training Deep Neural Networks with Biased Datacited by 255
  10. 2021Learning with Noisy Labels Revisited: A Study Using Real-World Human Annotationscited by 253
  11. 2019Towards Fairness in Visual Recognition: Effective Strategies for Bias Mitigationcited by 252
  12. 2019Human uncertainty makes classification more robustcited by 231
  13. 2021Trustworthy AI: From Principles to Practicescited by 206
  14. 2023Data-centric Artificial Intelligence: A Surveycited by 202
  15. 2019A Framework for Understanding Sources of Harm throughout the Machine Learning Life Cyclecited by 192
  16. 2019Deep learning with noisy labels: exploring techniques and remedies in medical image analysiscited by 173
  17. 2022Data Cards: Purposeful and Transparent Dataset Documentation for Responsible AIcited by 169
  18. 2017Deep Learning is Robust to Massive Label Noisecited by 164
  19. 2016Understanding How Image Quality Affects Deep Neural Networkscited by 118
  20. 2021Data Collection and Quality Challenges in Deep Learning: A Data-Centric AI Perspectivecited by 116
  21. 2018The Dataset Nutrition Label: A Framework To Drive Higher Data Quality Standardscited by 97
  22. 2021Trustworthy AI: A Computational Perspectivecited by 93
  23. 2022DataPerf: Benchmarks for Data-Centric AI Developmentcited by 89
  24. 2018The Devil of Face Recognition is in the Noisecited by 65
  25. 2019Garbage In, Garbage Out? Do Machine Learning Application Papers in Social Computing Report Where Human-Labeled Training Data Comes From?cited by 64
  26. 2020Trustworthy AIcited by 62
  27. 2019Can we trust deep learning models diagnosis? The impact of domain shift in chest radiograph classificationcited by 57
  28. 2019Adversarial Attacks on Deep Neural Networks for Time Series Classificationcited by 53
  29. 2022Is one annotation enough? A data-centric image classification benchmark for noisy and ambiguous label estimationcited by 43
  30. 2019Machine Learning with Multi-Site Imaging Data: An Empirical Study on the Impact of Scanner Effectscited by 40
  31. 2019Identifying Mislabeled Instances in Classification Datasetscited by 26
  32. 2022Healthsheet: Development of a Transparency Artifact for Health Datasetscited by 23
  33. 2016How Image Degradations Affect Deep CNN-based Face Recognition?cited by 20
  34. 2022"Why did the Model Fail?": Attributing Model Performance Changes to Distribution Shiftscited by 18
  35. 2023Does Image Anonymization Impact Computer Vision Training?cited by 12
  36. 2022Narrowing the Gap: Improved Detector Training with Noisy Location Annotationscited by 6
  37. 2018Impact of Ground Truth Annotation Quality on Performance of Semantic Image Segmentation of Traffic Conditionscited by 4
  38. 2019From Data Quality to Model Quality: an Exploratory Study on Deep Learningcited by 4

50 most cited of 53 All 53 (JSON)

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 8; 2026: 4.

13 papers.

Sort:

By area: