Cited by 70Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationEthics and Social Impacts of AI

Transparency of Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: Insights from Professionals in Computing and Healthcare Worldwide

Open access
Bernal, Jose, Mazo, Claudia·2022·Applied Sciences

Abstract

Although it is widely assumed that Artificial Intelligence (AI) will revolutionise healthcare in the near future, considerable progress must yet be made in order to gain the trust of healthcare professionals and patients. Improving AI transparency is a promising avenue for addressing such trust issues. However, transparency still lacks maturation and definitions. We seek to answer what challenges do experts and professionals in computing and healthcare identify concerning transparency of AI in healthcare? Here, we examine AI transparency in healthcare from five angles: interpretability, privacy, security, equity, and intellectual property. We respond to this question based on recent literature discussing the transparency of AI in healthcare and on an international online survey we sent to professionals working in computing and healthcare and potentially within AI. We collected responses from 40 professionals around the world. Overall, the survey results and current state of the art suggest key problems are a generalised lack of information available to the general public, a lack of understanding of transparency aspects covered in this work, and a lack of involvement of all stakeholders in the development of AI systems. We propose a set of recommendations, the implementation of which can enhance the transparency of AI in healthcare.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/app122010228

Cites

81 of 81 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Johnson, L. Chapter 3-Statutory and Regulatory GRC. In Security Controls Evaluation, Testing, and Assessment Handbook;
  2. Johnson, L., Ed.; Syngress: Boston, MA, USA, 2016; pp. 11-33. [CrossRef] · DOI
  3. WIPO. What Is Intellectual Property?; World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO): Geneva, Switzerland , 2020. [CrossRef] · DOI
  4. ACM. Statement on Algorithmic Transparency and Accountability. 2017. Available online: https://iapp.org/media/pdf/ resource_center/2017_usacm_statement_algorithms.pdf (accessed on 27 October 2021).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bernal, J., & Mazo, C.
Affiliations
  • German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), 39120 Magdeburg, Germany
  • Dublin City University (IE)
Corresponding author
Mazo, Claudia
Venue
Applied Sciences
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-10-11
Volume
12
Issue
20
Pages
10228
ISSN
2076-3417 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4304606367
Cited by
70
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 9
FWCI
4.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Applied Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • DZNE Pub (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Keywords
AI transparency, artificial intelligence in healthcare, interpretability, privacy, security (computing), equity, intellectual property, trust in AI, stakeholder engagement, expert opinion, public understanding of AI

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