Search

Background: Imaging plays a pivotal role in eye assessment. With the introduction of advanced machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI), the focus has shifted to imaging datasets in ophthalmology. While disparities and health inequalities hidden within data are well-documented, the ophthalmology field faces specific challenges to the creation and maintenance of datasets. Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) is useful for the diagnosis and monitoring of retinal pathologies, making it valuable for AI applications. This review aims to identify and compare the landscape of publicly available optical coherence tomography databases for AI applications., Methods: We conducted a literature review on OCT and AI articles with publicly accessible datasets, using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. The review retrieved 183 articles, and after full-text analysis, 50 articles were included. From the included articles were identified 8 publicly available OCT datasets, focusing on patient demographics and clinical details for thorough assessment and comparison., Results: The resulting datasets encompass 154,313 images collected from Spectralis, Cirrus HD, Topcon 3D, and Bioptigen devices. These datasets included normal exams, age-related macular degeneration, and diabetic maculopathy, among others. Comprehensive demographic information is available in one dataset and the USA is the most represented population., Discussion: Current publicly available OCT databases for AI applications exhibit limitations, stemming from their non-representative nature and the lack of comprehensive demographic information. Limited datasets hamper research and equitable AI development. To promote equitable AI algorithmic development in ophthalmology, there is a need for the creation and dissemination of more representative datasets.

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning are central components of today's medical environment. The fairness of AI, i.e. the ability of AI to be free from bias, has repeatedly come into question. This study investigates the diversity of members of academia whose scholarship poses questions about the fairness of AI. The articles that combine the topics of fairness, artificial intelligence, and medicine were selected from Pubmed, Google Scholar, and Embase using keywords. Eligibility and data extraction from the articles were done manually and cross-checked by another author for accuracy. Articles were selected for further analysis, cleaned, and organized in Microsoft Excel; spatial diagrams were generated using Public Tableau. Additional graphs were generated using Matplotlib and Seaborn. Linear and logistic regressions were conducted using Python to measure the relationship between funding status, number of citations, and the gender demographics of the authorship team. We identified 375 eligible publications, including research and review articles concerning AI and fairness in healthcare. Analysis of the bibliographic data revealed that there is an overrepresentation of authors that are white, male, and are from high-income countries, especially in the roles of first and last author. Additionally, analysis showed that papers whose authors are based in higher-income countries were more likely to be cited more often and published in higher impact journals. These findings highlight the lack of diversity among the authors in the AI fairness community whose work gains the largest readership, potentially compromising the very impartiality that the AI fairness community is working towards., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Alberto et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)