Cited by 5Ethics and Social Impacts of AIArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)

Algorithmic bias, generalist models, and clinical medicine

Open access
Keeling, Geoff·2024·AI and Ethics

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s43681-023-00329-x

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Training models with data representative of the diverse populations being served is helpful, but new types of bias, such as semantic biases, may arise in LLMs.

    “Training models with data representative of the diverse populations being served is helpful, but new types of bias, such as semantic biases, may arise in LLMs [59].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 64 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keeling, G.
Affiliations
Google (United Kingdom) (GB)
Corresponding author
Keeling, Geoff
Venue
AI and Ethics
Published
2023-08-14
Volume
4
Issue
4
Pages
1533-1544
ISSN
  • 2730-5953 (ISSN-L)
  • 2730-5961
OpenAlex
W4385806884
Cited by
5
References
64
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1
FWCI
1.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • AI and Ethics (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Keywords
algorithmic bias, machine learning in healthcare, large language models, BERT, Arecaceae, prompting, fine-tuning, biomedical data, bias mitigation, bioethics, diagnosis, treatment guidelines, training data bias

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review