Standardization and accuracy of race and ethnicity data: Equity implications for medical AI

The rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into healthcare has raised many concerns about race bias in AI models. Yet, overlooked in this dialogue is the lack of quality control for the accuracy of patient race and ethnicity (r/e) data in electronic health records (EHR). This article critically examines the factors driving inaccurate and unrepresentative r/e datasets. These include conceptual uncertainties about how to categorize races and ethnicity, shortcomings in data collection practices, EHR standards, and the misclassification of patients' race or ethnicity. To address these challenges, we propose a two-pronged action plan. First, we present a set of best practices for healthcare systems and medical AI researchers to improve r/e data accuracy. Second, we call for developers of medical AI models to transparently warrant the quality of their r/e data. Given the ethical and scientific imperatives of ensuring high-quality r/e data in AI-driven healthcare, we argue that these steps should be taken immediately.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLOS Digital Health
Published
2025-05-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000807
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Race, Genetics, and Society
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
7.27

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Standardization and accuracy of race and ethnicity data: Equity implications for medical AI

Francis X. Shen, Alexandra Tsalidis, Lakshmi Bharadwaj
4 citations
PLOS Digital Health
Race, Genetics, and Society
7.27
article

Standardization and accuracy of race and ethnicity data: Equity implications for medical AI

Francis X. Shen, Alexandra Tsalidis, Lakshmi Bharadwaj
article en
4 citations

Abstract

The rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into healthcare has raised many concerns about race bias in AI models. Yet, overlooked in this dialogue is the lack of quality control for the accuracy of patient race and ethnicity (r/e) data in electronic health records (EHR). This article critically examines the factors driving inaccurate and unrepresentative r/e datasets. These include conceptual uncertainties about how to categorize races and ethnicity, shortcomings in data collection practices, EHR standards, and the misclassification of patients' race or ethnicity. To address these challenges, we propose a two-pronged action plan. First, we present a set of best practices for healthcare systems and medical AI researchers to improve r/e data accuracy. Second, we call for developers of medical AI models to transparently warrant the quality of their r/e data. Given the ethical and scientific imperatives of ensuring high-quality r/e data in AI-driven healthcare, we argue that these steps should be taken immediately.

PLOS Digital HealthVol. 4(5)
University of Minnesota (US), Emory University (US), University of Minnesota System (US), Massachusetts General Hospital (US), Institute for the Future (US), Tech Foundation (US)
Office of the Director
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Race, Genetics, and Society
7.27
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Standardization and accuracy of race and ethnicity data: Equity implications for medical AI — Francis X. Shen, Alexandra Tsalidis, et al. · PLOS Digital Health (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS