Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 minor 31 references

Deep Learning Estimation of Sex, Age, Height, and Weight from CT-derived Digitally Reconstructed Radiographs

T0 review · 0 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read One coronal X-ray-like projection of a CT scan, passed through an ensemble of three neural networks, predicts an adult's sex, age, height, and weight—with 99.7% sex accuracy and mean absolute errors of 3.6 years, 2.6 cm, and 3.4 kg.

desk verdict Solid, well-validated application paper; the DICOM-label caveat is real but the central claim, agreement with recorded metadata, holds. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.18638 v1 pith:E7NZVWFO submitted 2026-07-21 cs.CV cs.AI

Tomohiro Kikuchi , Kohei Yamamoto , Yukihiro Nomura , Yosuke Yamagishi , Takeharu Yoshikawa , Toshiaki Akashi , Jun Kamohara , Hiroyuki Fujii
show 1 more author
Harushi Mori
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CVcs.AI
keywords computedtomographydigitallyreconstructedradiographmultitaskdeeplearningdemographicestimationanthropometricsexclassificationagebodysurfaceareanormalization
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper aims to show that a patient's sex, age, height, and weight can be recovered from diagnostic CT images alone, using a single synthetic X-ray projection per scan. The authors train a three-model deep-learning ensemble on more than 128,000 CT examinations from adults across nine institutions and test it on an institution never seen during training. The ensemble achieves near-perfect sex classification and small errors in age, height, and weight, with the best results on scans covering the full torso. If this holds, it would allow researchers to fill in missing or inconsistent patient metadata in large retrospective imaging databases and to perform body-size normalization of organ measurements without recorded height or weight.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the digitally reconstructed radiograph (DRR): a single coronal, parallel-projection X-ray-like image computed from each 3D CT volume using Beer–Lambert line integrals, with voxel spacing preserved so that real-world scale (and thus body-size information) is retained in the 2D image. This 640×320-pixel projection is fed to three deep encoders—a convolutional network and two vision transformer variants—sharing a multitask head that predicts sex as a classification and age, height, and weight as regressions. The three models' outputs are combined by weighted averaging, with the ensemble weights optimized on a separate tuning set. Preserving physical scale in the DRR is

What would settle it

Measure height and weight on the same day as a CT scan in a new cohort spanning the full weight range, run the model, and compare its outputs to those measured values; if the mean absolute errors are much larger than 2.59 cm and 3.40 kg, or the systematic underestimation above 100 kg remains, the central claim that the model recovers true body size from CT would be refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a weighted ensemble of three deep image encoders—fine-tuned on coronal digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) generated from diagnostic CT—can simultaneously estimate adult sex, age, height, and weight. On an institution-external test set of 10,169 examinations, sex-classification accuracy reached 0.997 (95% CI, 0.996–0.998), and mean absolute errors were 3.57 years for age, 2.59 cm for height, and 3.40 kg for weight. Performance was best for examinations covering the chest through pelvis (Torso), where sex accuracy hit 1.000 and errors dropped to 3.15 years, 2.28 cm, and 3.18 kg. The authors further demonstrate that body surface area computed from the m

Load-bearing premise

The study's numbers assume that the age, height, and weight stored in each CT file are the ground truth; if those records are self-reported, outdated, or inconsistently entered, the reported errors measure agreement with the database rather than with true measurements.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • - If the accuracy holds, researchers can recover sex, age, height, and weight from CT archives even when those fields are missing or corrupted, enabling secondary studies on existing scans.
  • - The performance gradient with anatomical coverage means full-torso scans are the most reliable source for these estimates; partial-coverage scans still provide useful but less precise estimates.
  • - Body surface area calculated from model-estimated height and weight can replace measured BSA in normalizing organ volumes for age-related trends, at least at the population level.
  • - On new populations with different body-size distributions, direct transfer degrades particularly for height, but continued fine-tuning from the original model substantially reduces this error, suggesting the pretrained model is a strong starting point for adaptation.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • - Because the model relies only on a coronal projection, adding a lateral projection or full 3D context could reduce weight error at the high end, where the paper already observes systematic underestimation above 100 kg; this is a testable architecture extension the paper leaves implicit.
  • - The near-ceiling sex classification implies CT images encode demographic information that can be read without patient metadata; this has privacy implications for anonymized imaging databases, which the paper itself flags, and suggests that de-identification of images alone does not hide sensitive attributes.
  • - The method could serve as a quality-control tool for imaging databases: large discrepancies between stored metadata and model estimates might flag transcription errors or incorrect patient records, a use the paper does not develop.
  • - The finding that height transfer degrades across populations with different average statures suggests the model learns population-specific height priors; a straightforward test would be to train on a multi-ethnic dataset and measure whether the height MAE drops for all groups.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

0 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops and validates a multitask deep learning ensemble (ConvNeXt-Base, ViT-Base/16, MaxViT-Base) that estimates adult sex, age, height, and weight from coronal digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) generated from diagnostic CT. The models were trained on 114,147 examinations from seven Japanese institutions, tuned on 4,305 examinations from one institution, and tested on 10,169 examinations from another institution. The weighted ensemble achieved a sex-classification accuracy of 0.997 (95% CI, 0.996–0.998) and MAEs of 3.57 years, 2.59 cm, and 3.40 kg for age, height, and weight on the external test set. Performance was generally better for examinations with broader anatomical coverage. A proof-of-concept showed that BSA computed from estimated versus recorded height/weight reproduces age-related heart and liver volume trends. Cross-domain validation on ENHANCE.PET and RATIC is reported, with continued fine-tuning reducing height error on non-Japanese data. The authors make model weights and inference code publicly available.

Significance. If the results hold, this work provides a scalable tool for imputing missing demographic and anthropometric metadata in large retrospective CT databases, with implications for radiation dose estimation, body-size normalization, and epidemiological analyses. The paper has notable strengths: a very large multi-institutional training set, institution-level disjoint tuning and test splits, patient-level bootstrap confidence intervals, per-anatomical-region performance reporting, explicit cross-domain evaluation, and public release of code and weights. The claims are carefully bounded in most of the manuscript, and the main limitation—use of DICOM metadata as the reference standard—is disclosed. These practices are exemplary and increase confidence in the reported performance.

minor comments (6)
  1. [Discussion, Limitations (paragraph 4)] The dependence on DICOM metadata is acknowledged, but the manuscript repeatedly refers to 'true' age, height, and weight (e.g., Figure 3, Figure 5, and the BSA analyses). This conflates agreement with the clinical record with agreement with independently measured biological values. Please replace 'true' with 'reference' or 'recorded' throughout, and add a sentence in the Abstract or Conclusion clarifying that reported errors are relative to DICOM metadata. This is especially important because height/weight may be self-reported or measured at a different time.
  2. [Materials and Methods: Case selection (Figure 2)] The flowchart appears to display the two exclusion criteria in reverse order. The narrative states that eligibility required available anthropometric attributes and age ≥18, with subsequent exclusion for insufficient vertebral coverage, but the boxes list 'Examinations with ≥1 axial image showing ≥3 vertebrae: 136,272' above 'Cases with available anthropometric information: 169,024.' The implied arithmetic (283,132 − 114,108 = 169,024; then − 32,752 = 136,272) should be clarified by reordering the boxes or adding explicit arrows.
  3. [Materials and Methods: Dataset (cross-domain)] The text says 'two non-Japanese datasets' were used, but RATIC provides sex and age only, while height and weight are not evaluated. For clarity, indicate in Table 3 or the main text which attributes are evaluated on each cross-domain dataset.
  4. [Results: Table 2] Table 2 reports the ensemble's performance on the tuning set, which was also used for early stopping and for optimizing the ensemble weights. This is not an unbiased performance estimate. It would be helpful to label this as a development-set result and note that the test set is the primary external validation.
  5. [Materials and Methods: DRR Generation and Preprocessing] The canvas size of 640 × 320 pixels at 1.5 mm/pixel corresponds to 960 × 480 mm. Please clarify whether the full body is contained within this canvas for the largest patients. If cropping occurs, describe how the 'real-world-scale-preserving' property interacts with the fixed canvas and how height estimation remains robust when the body extends beyond the field of view. A sentence in the text or a supplementary figure showing the canvas relative to the full DRR extent would resolve this ambiguity.
  6. [Discussion, Limitations (paragraph 4)] Given that the downstream use case is imputing missing metadata, agreement with the database record is the relevant target. However, the absence of an independent label audit means that the proportion of the reported MAE attributable to label noise is unknown. Even a small subsample audit, or at least a quantitative discussion of how self-reported height/weight errors would propagate through the reported MAEs, would strengthen the interpretation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the central test evaluation is held-out and the ensemble weights are fixed before test.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is an empirical generalization result: models are trained on CT-derived DRRs with DICOM metadata labels, the ensemble weights are optimized on a tuning set, and the reported test metrics come from an institution-disjoint test set. No test-set value is used to adjust the model or the ensemble. The BSA proof-of-concept overlays curves computed from true versus predicted height and weight and does not fit any constant to the test data, so it is a downstream demonstration rather than a circular prediction. The only self-citations (references 4 and 18) are background or dataset-description references and are not load-bearing for the derivation of the prediction claim. The acknowledged limitation that height and weight labels may be self-reported or measured at a different time affects label validity, not circularity: the stated target is agreement with the recorded DICOM metadata, and the reported MAEs measure agreement with that record. No equation reduces to its own input, and no fitted parameter is renamed as an independent prediction. Therefore no circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim is empirical and depends mainly on label reliability, the informativeness of coronal DRRs, and standard physics/math. No new physical entities or mediators are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • Ensemble aggregation weights = 0.3954 (ConvNeXt-Base), 0.3103 (ViT-Base/16), 0.2943 (MaxViT-Base)
    Optimized on the tuning set using Nelder-Mead; fixed for all test predictions.
  • Regression target standardization and clipping threshold = Training-set mean/SD; clip at ±3 SD
    Labels standardized and outliers clipped; affects performance at weight extremes (>100 kg).
  • DRR spatial resolution and canvas size = 1.5 mm/pixel; 640×320 canvas
    Selected based on preliminary experiments on 1,324 Torso tuning examinations (Appendix S2).
  • Training hyperparameters = AdamW lr 5e-5, weight decay 0.01, batch 64/32, max 50 epochs, early stopping 5
    Hand-chosen fine-tuning configuration; standard but not justified by a search.
  • Loss weighting = Unweighted mean of BCE + 3 MSEs
    Hand-chosen; treats sex classification and three regressions equally.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption DICOM metadata for sex, age, height, and weight are correct and representative of the patient at the time of CT
    All training and test labels come from DICOM metadata; the authors note that measurement timing and self-report status are unknown.
  • domain assumption Coronal DRRs preserve real-world scale and sufficient anatomical cues for all four attributes
    The central idea of the method; supported only by the reported test performance, not independently verified.
  • domain assumption TotalSegmentator vertebral labels accurately determine anatomical coverage regions
    Used for eligibility (≥3 vertebrae) and region assignment; segmentation errors could misclassify coverage.
  • domain assumption Reference labels in ENHANCE.PET and RATIC are reliable
    External validation depends on the metadata in these public datasets.
  • standard math Beer-Lambert law and Du Bois formula are valid for DRR generation and BSA calculation
    Standard physics and clinical formulas used without proof.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Deep Learning Estimation of Sex, Age, Height, and Weight from CT-derived Digitally Reconstructed Radiographs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/E7NZVWFO

@misc{pith2026260718638,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Deep Learning Estimation of Sex, Age, Height, and Weight from CT-derived Digitally Reconstructed Radiographs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/E7NZVWFO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.18638}
}
read the original abstract

Purpose: To develop and validate a deep learning ensemble for estimating adult sex, age, height, and weight from coronal digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) generated from diagnostic CT. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 128,621 CT examinations from 80,004 adults at nine institutions in Japan. Three multitask models-ConvNeXt-Base, ViT-Base/16, and MaxViT-Base-were fine-tuned using coronal DRRs and combined by weighted averaging. Data were split by institution into training (114,147 examinations; seven institutions), tuning (4,305; one institution), and test (10,169; one institution) sets; generalizability was assessed on two non-Japanese datasets. Accuracy and mean absolute error (MAE) were used to evaluate sex classification and age, height, and weight regression, respectively. Body surface area (BSA)-corrected heart and liver volume trends were compared using true versus estimated height and weight. Results: In the test set (median age, 69.9 years; 4,899 of 10,169 [48.2%] male), overall sex-classification accuracy was 0.997 (95% CI, 0.996-0.998), and MAEs were 3.57 years (3.51-3.63), 2.59 cm (2.54-2.64), and 3.40 kg (3.34-3.47) for age, height, and weight, respectively. In examinations covering the chest through pelvis, accuracy was 1.000, and MAEs were 3.15 years, 2.28 cm, and 3.18 kg, respectively. BSA calculated from estimated values reproduced age-related heart and liver volume trends obtained using true values. On non-Japanese datasets, height error increased but was reduced by continued fine-tuning. Conclusion: The ensemble estimated adult sex, age, height, and weight from CT-derived DRRs, with generally lower errors in examinations with broader anatomical coverage.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.18638 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Flowchart of case selection. J-MID = Japan Medical Image Database. For cross-domain evaluation, two public datasets were used: ENHANCE.PET (20), comprising CT acquired as part of whole-/total-body FDG-PET/CT from German and Italian centers, and RATIC (21), comprising abdominal trauma CT from institutions in multiple countries. Eligibility required only that the reference attributes be available; height and weight we… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Scatter plots of predicted versus true age, height, and weight in Torso cases. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Representative inference results in Torso cases. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: shows heart and liver volumes in Torso test examinations together with the fitted regression curves. At the population level, the predicted-BSA and true-BSA curves were closely superimposed, and their 95% confidence intervals overlapped throughout, whereas the uncorrec…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    ConvNeXt-Base and ViT-Base/16 were initialized with DINOv3-pretrained weights, whereas MaxViT-Base was initialized with ImageNet-1K-pretrained weights

    Study overview During training, a real-world–scale–preserving coronal DRR was generated from each eligible CT series and used to fine-tune three multitask models: ConvNeXt-Base, ViT-Base/16, and MaxViT-Base. ConvNeXt-Base and ViT-Base/16 were initialized with DINOv3-pretrained weights, whereas MaxViT-Base was initialized with ImageNet-1K-pretrained weight...

    2024

  2. [2]

    J-MID = Japan Medical Image Database

    Flowchart of case selection. J-MID = Japan Medical Image Database. For cross-domain evaluation, two public datasets were used: ENHANCE.PET (20), comprising CT acquired as part of whole-/total-body FDG-PET/CT from German and Italian centers, and RATIC (21), comprising abdominal trauma CT from institutions in multiple countries. Eligibility required only th...

    2024

  3. [3]

    The UK Biobank imaging enhancement of 100,000 participants: rationale, data collection, management and future directions

    Littlejohns TJ, Holliday J, Gibson LM, et al. The UK Biobank imaging enhancement of 100,000 participants: rationale, data collection, management and future directions. Nat Commun 2020;11(1):2624. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-15948-9

    doi:10.1038/s41467-020-15948-9 2020

  4. [6]

    Deep learning-based body weight from scout images can be an alternative to actual body weight in CT radiation dose management

    Ichikawa S, Itadani H, Sugimori H. Deep learning-based body weight from scout images can be an alternative to actual body weight in CT radiation dose management. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2023;24(8):e14080. doi: 10.1002/acm2.14080

    work page doi:10.1002/acm2.14080 2023

  5. [7]

    Published June 11,

    doi: 10.1007/s11604-026-02028-z. Published June 11,

    work page doi:10.1007/s11604-026-02028-z

  6. [9]

    Body charts from CT segmentations across the adult lifespan: large-scale cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses

    Wachinger C, Renger B, Späth C, Makowski MR. Body charts from CT segmentations across the adult lifespan: large-scale cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. Radiol Artif Intell 2026;8(2):e250506. doi: 10.1148/ryai.250506

    doi:10.1148/ryai.250506 2026

  7. [10]

    Skeletal muscle area on CT: determination of an optimal height scaling power and testing for mortality risk prediction

    Blankemeier L, Yao L, Long J, et al. Skeletal muscle area on CT: determination of an optimal height scaling power and testing for mortality risk prediction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2024;222(1):e2329889. doi: 10.2214/AJR.23.29889

    work page doi:10.2214/ajr.23.29889 2024

  8. [11]

    forensics

    Yi PH, Wei J, Kim TK, et al. Radiology “forensics”: determination of age and sex from chest radiographs using deep learning. Emerg Radiol 2021;28(5):949–954. doi: 10.1007/s10140-021-01953-y

    work page doi:10.1007/s10140-021-01953-y 2021

Show all 31 references
  1. [12]

    Predicting patient demographics from chest radiographs with deep learning

    Adleberg J, Wardeh A, Doo FX, et al. Predicting patient demographics from chest radiographs with deep learning. J Am Coll Radiol 2022;19(10):1151–1161. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2022.06.008

    2022 doi

  2. [13]

    Chest radiography as a biomarker of ageing: artificial intelligence-based, multi-institutional model development and validation in Japan

    Mitsuyama Y, Matsumoto T, Tatekawa H, et al. Chest radiography as a biomarker of ageing: artificial intelligence-based, multi-institutional model development and validation in Japan. Lancet Healthy Longev 2023;4(9):e478–e486. doi: 10.1016/S2666-7568(23)00133-2

    2023 doi

  3. [14]

    A deep-learning method using computed tomography scout images for estimating patient body weight

    Ichikawa S, Hamada M, Sugimori H. A deep-learning method using computed tomography scout images for estimating patient body weight. Sci Rep 2021;11(1):15627. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-95170-9

    2021 doi

  4. [15]

    Determining body height and weight from thoracic and abdominal CT localizers in pediatric and young adult patients using deep learning

    Demircioğlu A, Quinsten AS, Umutlu L, Forsting M, Nassenstein K, Bos D. Determining body height and weight from thoracic and abdominal CT localizers in pediatric and young adult patients using deep learning. Sci Rep 2023;13(1):19010. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-46080-5

    2023 doi

  5. [16]

    Deep learning-based age estimation from clinical computed tomography image data of the thorax and abdomen in the adult population

    Kerber B, Hepp T, Küstner T, Gatidis S. Deep learning-based age estimation from clinical computed tomography image data of the thorax and abdomen in the adult population. PLoS One 2023;18(11):e0292993. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0292993

    2023 doi

  6. [17]

    Checklist for artificial intelligence in medical imaging (CLAIM): 2024 update

    Tejani AS, Klontzas ME, Gatti AA, et al. Checklist for artificial intelligence in medical imaging (CLAIM): 2024 update. Radiol Artif Intell 2024;6(4):e240300. doi: 10.1148/ryai.240300

    2024 doi

  7. [19]

    3D deep learning on medical images: a review

    Singh SP, Wang L, Gupta S, Goli H, Padmanabhan P, Gulyás B. 3D deep learning on medical images: a review. Sensors (Basel) 2020;20(18):5097. doi: 10.3390/s20185097

    2020 doi

  8. [20]

    Deep learning approaches using 2D and 3D convolutional neural networks for generating male pelvic synthetic computed tomography from magnetic resonance imaging

    Fu J, Yang Y, Singhrao K, et al. Deep learning approaches using 2D and 3D convolutional neural networks for generating male pelvic synthetic computed tomography from magnetic resonance imaging. Med Phys 2019;46(9):3788–3798. doi: 10.1002/mp.13672

    2019 doi

  9. [21]

    Fast calculation of the exact radiological path for a three-dimensional CT array

    Siddon RL. Fast calculation of the exact radiological path for a three-dimensional CT array. Med Phys 1985;12(2):252–255. doi: 10.1118/1.595715

    1985 doi

  10. [22]

    A ConvNet for the 2020s

    Liu Z, Mao H, Wu CY, Feichtenhofer C, Darrell T, Xie S. A ConvNet for the 2020s. In: Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2022:11966–11976. doi: 10.1109/CVPR52688.2022.01167

    2022

  11. [23]

    Japan-Medical Image Database (J-MID): medical big data supporting data science

    Akashi T, Kumamaru KK, Wada A, et al. Japan-Medical Image Database (J-MID): medical big data supporting data science. Juntendo Med J 2025;71(3):166–172. doi: 10.14789/ejmj.JMJ25-0004-P

    2025 doi

  12. [24]

    TotalSegmentator: robust segmentation of 104 anatomic structures in CT images

    Wasserthal J, Breit HC, Meyer MT, et al. TotalSegmentator: robust segmentation of 104 anatomic structures in CT images. Radiol Artif Intell 2023;5(5):e230024. doi: 10.1148/ryai.230024

    2023 doi

  13. [25]

    Sharing a whole-/total-body [18F]FDG-PET/CT dataset with CT-derived segmentations: an ENHANCE.PET initiative

    Ferrara D, Pires M, Gutschmayer S, et al. Sharing a whole-/total-body [18F]FDG-PET/CT dataset with CT-derived segmentations: an ENHANCE.PET initiative. Sci Data 2026;13:869. doi: 10.1038/s41597-026-07218-y

    2026 doi

  14. [26]

    The RSNA Abdominal Traumatic Injury CT (RATIC) dataset

    Rudie JD, Lin HM, Ball RL, et al. The RSNA Abdominal Traumatic Injury CT (RATIC) dataset. Radiol Artif Intell 2024;6(6):e240101. doi: 10.1148/ryai.240101

    2024 doi

  15. [27]

    Morphometric analysis of sex differences in contemporary Japanese pelves using multidetector computed tomography

    Torimitsu S, Makino Y, Saitoh H, et al. Morphometric analysis of sex differences in contemporary Japanese pelves using multidetector computed tomography. Forensic Sci Int 2015;257:530.e1–530.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2015.10.018

    2015 doi

  16. [28]

    An image is worth 16×16 words: transformers for image recognition at scale

    Dosovitskiy A, Beyer L, Kolesnikov A, et al. An image is worth 16×16 words: transformers for image recognition at scale. Presented at: International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR); May 3–7, 2021; virtual

    2021

  17. [30]

    Siméoni O, Vo HV, Seitzer M, et al. DINOv3. arXiv:2508.10104 [preprint]. Posted August 13,

    arXiv

  18. [31]

    Accessed June 28, 2026

    2026

  19. [32]

    Deep learning prediction of sex on chest radiographs: a potential contributor to biased algorithms

    Li D, Lin CT, Sulam J, Yi PH. Deep learning prediction of sex on chest radiographs: a potential contributor to biased algorithms. Emerg Radiol 2022;29(2):365–370. doi: 10.1007/s10140-022-02019-3

    2022 doi

  20. [34]

    AI recognition of patient race in medical imaging: a modelling study

    Gichoya JW, Banerjee I, Bhimireddy AR, et al. AI recognition of patient race in medical imaging: a modelling study. Lancet Digit Health 2022;4(6):e406–e414. doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(22)00063-2 Appendix S1. Imaging characteristics of the training, tuning, and test datasets Attri...

    2022 doi

  21. [2022]

    Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2022:459–479

    Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13684. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2022:459–479. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-20053-3_27

    2022 doi

  22. [2025]

    Published December 16,

    doi: 10.1007/s10278-025-01776-0. Published December 16,

    doi

  23. [2026]

    Published February 12,

    doi: 10.1038/s41551-025-01599-y. Published February 12,

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.