Data drift in medical machine learning: implications and potential remedies
Open accessAbstract
Data drift refers to differences between the data used in training a machine learning (ML) model and that applied to the model in real-world operation. Medical ML systems can be exposed to various forms of data drift, including differences between the data sampled for training and used in clinical operation, differences between medical practices or context of use between training and clinical use, and time-related changes in patient populations, disease patterns, and data acquisition, to name a few. In this article, we first review the terminology used in ML literature related to data drift, define distinct types of drift, and discuss in detail potential causes within the context of medical applications with an emphasis on medical imaging. We then review the recent literature regarding the effects of data drift on medical ML systems, which overwhelmingly show that data drift can be a major cause for performance deterioration. We then discuss methods for monitoring data drift and mitigating its effects with an emphasis on pre- and post-deployment techniques. Some of the potential methods for drift detection and issues around model retraining when drift is detected are included. Based on our review, we find that data drift is a major concern in medical ML deployment and that more research is needed so that ML models can identify drift early, incorporate effective mitigation strategies and resist performance decay.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Periodic auditing should enable the identification of data or concept drifts, newly occurring biases, performance degradation or changes in the decision making of the end users.
“The periodic auditing should enable the identification of data or concept drifts, newly occurring biases, performance degradation or changes in the decision making of the end users.55”
From FUTURE-AI: international consensus guideline for trustworthy and deployable artificial intelligence in healthcare (2025) · cites this paper as [55]
The Potential Remedies section supports post-deployment monitoring to detect data drift and performance decay. The Types and Causes section identifies changes in physicians’ behavior, including automation bias, as a form of clinical-context drift. The paper does not specifically say that periodic auditing can identify newly occurring biases or changes in end users’ decision-making. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 76 · Cited by 279
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Szegedy C, Zaremba W, Sutskever I, Bruna J, Erhan D, Goodfellow I, et al. Intriguing properties of neural networks. 2013. Available from: arXiv preprint arXiv:13126199
- Amodei D, Olah C, Steinhardt J, Christiano P, Schulman J, Mané D. Concrete problems in AI safety. 2016. Available from: arXiv preprint arXiv:160606565
- Park C, Awadalla A, Kohno T, Patel S. Reliable and Trustworthy Machine Learning for Health Using Dataset Shift Detection. In: Ranzato M, Beygelzimer A, Dauphin Y, et al, eds. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems: Curran Associates, Inc. ; 2021, pp. 3043-56.
- Authors
- Sahiner, B., Chen, W., Samala, R. K., & Petrick, N.
- Affiliations
- United States Food and Drug Administration (US)
- Venue
- The British Journal of Radiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2023-03-27
- Volume
- 96
- Issue
- 1150
- Pages
- 20220878-20220878
- ISSN
- 0007-1285 (ISSN-L)
- 1748-880X
- PMC
- PMC10546450
- OpenAlex
- W4361003621
- Cited by
- 279
- References
- 76
- Citations by year
- 2026: 134 · 2025: 91 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 3.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
- Locations
- British Journal of Radiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Data Stream Mining Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
- Keywords
- data drift, machine learning in medicine, diagnostic imaging, drift detection, drift reduction, model retraining, performance degradation, clinical deployment, model monitoring
- MeSH terms
- Machine Learning, Medical Informatics Computing
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