Fairness or Fallacy? Mapping the Landscape of AI Bias in Disease Detection

The integration of medical imaging and clinical text has enabled the emergence of generalist artificial intelligence (AI) systems for healthcare. However, pervasive biases, such as imbalanced disease prevalence, skewed anatomical region distributions, heterogeneous imaging protocols, and demographic disparities, pose significant challenges to the fairness and reliability of vision-language systems in real-world clinical settings. Here we present BiasCareVL, a bias-aware multimodal learning framework that introduces bias control directly into model design, rather than treating it as a post hoc correction. BiasCareVL incorporates adaptive uncertainty modeling with optional human-in-the-loop refinement to regulate the influence of dominant data patterns and to promote equitable reasoning under distributional imbalance. Trained on 3.44 million samples spanning over 15 imaging modalities, the framework supports diverse clinical tasks, including visual question answering, disease classification, segmentation, and report generation within a unified representation space. Across eight public benchmarks covering dermatology, oncology, radiology, and pathology, BiasCareVL consistently outperforms 20 state-of-the-art methods, with pronounced gains in clinically challenging scenarios, including over 10% accuracy improvement in multi-class skin lesion diagnosis and more than 20% Dice improvement in small tumor segmentation. Furthermore, BiasCareVL achieves diagnostic performance exceeding human accuracy with substantially reduced time requirements when evaluated with board-certified radiologists. By open-sourcing BiasCareVL, we aim to promote a transparent, reproducible, and equitable future for AI in healthcare, paving the way for general-purpose, trustworthy, and clinically reliable AI systems.

Healthcare disparities persist across socioeconomic boundaries, often attributed to unequal access to screening, diagnostics, and therapeutics. However, this perspective highlights that critical biases can emerge much earlier, during data collection and research prioritization, long before clinical implementation, particularly in studies focused on molecular and omics data. A vast number of studies focus on collecting omics data, but the demographic information associated with these datasets is often not reported, and when it is reported, it reveals substantial biases. An automated analysis of 4514 PubMed-indexed omics publications from 2015 to 2024, examining reporting across multiple demographic dimensions, reveals limited reporting overall; for example, only 2.7% of studies report ancestry or ethnicity information and geographic origin reporting is limited to 2.5%. Analysis of large-scale datasets commonly used for model training, such as CellxGene and GEO, reveals substantial population bias where European-ancestry data dominates. As biomedical foundation models become central to biomedical discovery with a paradigm in which base models are pretrained on large datasets and reusing them repeatedly for many different downstream tasks, they risk perpetuating or amplifying these early-stage biases, leading to cascading inequities that regulatory interventions cannot fully reverse. We propose a community-wide focus on three foundational principles: Provenance, Openness, and Reliability through Evaluation Transparency. Together, these principles can help make biases and limitations more visible to model developers and users, supporting more informed model development, evaluation, and deployment decisions in biomedical AI.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has achieved remarkable success in medical imaging, but it is widely recognized that these models often perform inconsistently across real-world clinical settings. Such inconsistencies occur when patient demographics and imaging protocols vary, for example, in detecting small tumors, analyzing scans from different contrast phases, or evaluating patients of different ages or sexes. To quantify these inconsistencies, we develop a large-scale, open benchmark of 85,355 CT scans that systematically evaluates 12 tumor-detection AI models across tumor size, location, patient subgroup, and imaging protocol. We leverage large language models (LLMs) to extract and organize subgroup information from clinical data, which makes the analysis both scalable and reproducible. Our benchmark reveals that current state-of-the-art AI models, optimized for average accuracy, perform poorly in rare or underrepresented subgroups, such as young, female African Americans. However, collecting sufficient annotated data for these rare cases is often impractical. The benchmark provides a foundation for building more reliable and robust AI models for tumor detection and highlighting the need for rigorous, subgroup-level evaluation in medical imaging and computer vision. Datasets, code