Judy Wawira Gichoya

Dr. Judy Wawira Gichoya


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

15Years (2012-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
8 January 2025 in Nature Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JGJack Gallifant
Jack Gallifant
MAMajid Afshar
Majid Afshar
SASaleem Ameen
Saleem Ameen
YAYindalon Aphinyanaphongs
Yindalon Aphinyanaphongs
SCShan Chen
Shan Chen
DBDanielle S. Bitterman
Danielle S. Bitterman
Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly being adopted in healthcare, necessitating standardized reporting guidelines. We present transparent reporting of a multivariable model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD)-LLM, an extension of the TRIPOD + artificial intelligence statement, addressing the unique challenges of LLMs in biomedical applications. TRIPOD-LLM provides a comprehensive checklist of 19 main items and 50 subitems, covering key aspects from title to discussion. The guidelines introduce a modular format accommodating various LLM research designs and tasks, with 14 main items and 32 subitems applicable across all categories. Developed through an expedited Delphi process and expert consensus, TRIPOD-LLM emphasizes transparency, human oversight and task-specific performance reporting. We also introduce an interactive website (https://tripod-llm.vercel.app/) facilitating easy guideline completion and PDF generation for submission. As a living document, TRIPOD-LLM will evolve with the field, aiming to enhance the quality, reproducibility and clinical applicability of LLM research in healthcare through comprehensive reporting.

11 May 2022 in The Lancet Digital Health
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
Judy Wawira GichoyaJudy Wawira Gichoya
Judy Wawira Gichoya
IBImon Banerjee
Imon Banerjee
ABAnanth Reddy Bhimireddy
Ananth Reddy Bhimireddy
JBJohn L Burns
John L Burns
LCLeo Anthony Celi
Leo Anthony Celi
HZHaoran Zhang
Haoran Zhang
Previous studies in medical imaging have shown disparate abilities of artificial intelligence (AI) to detect a person’s race, yet there is no known correlation for race on medical imaging that would be obvious to human experts when interpreting the images. We aimed to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the ability of AI to recognise a patient’s racial identity from medical images. Using private (Emory CXR, Emory Chest CT, Emory Cervical Spine, and Emory Mammogram) and public (MIMIC-CXR, CheXpert, National Lung Cancer Screening Trial, RSNA Pulmonary Embolism CT, and Digital Hand Atlas) datasets, we evaluated, first, performance quantification of deep learning models in detecting race from medical images, including the ability of these models to generalise to external environments and across multiple imaging modalities. Second, we assessed possible confounding of anatomic and phenotypic population features by assessing the ability of these hypothesised confounders to detect race in isolation using regression models, and by re-evaluating the deep learning models by testing them on datasets stratified by these hypothesised confounding variables. Last, by exploring the effect of image corruptions on model performance, we investigated the underlying mechanism by which AI models can recognise race. In our study, we show that standard AI deep learning models can be trained to predict race from medical images with high performance across multiple imaging modalities, which was sustained under external validation conditions (x-ray imaging [area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) range 0·91–0·99], CT chest imaging [0·87–0·96], and mammography [0·81]). We also showed that this detection is not due to proxies or imaging-related surrogate covariates for race (eg, performance of possible confounders: body-mass index [AUC 0·55], disease distribution [0·61], and breast density [0·61]). Finally, we provide evidence to show that the ability of AI deep learning models persisted over all anatomical regions and frequency spectrums of the images, suggesting the efforts to control this behaviour when it is undesirable will be challenging and demand further study. The results from our study emphasise that the ability of AI deep learning models to predict self-reported race is itself not the issue of importance. However, our finding that AI can accurately predict self-reported race, even from corrupted, cropped, and noised medical images, often when clinical experts cannot, creates an enormous risk for all model deployments in medical imaging. National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, MIDRC grant of National Institutes of Health, US National Science Foundation, National Library of Medicine of the National Institutes of Health, and Taiwan Ministry of Science and Technology.

28 June 2024 in Nature Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
YYYuzhe Yang
Yuzhe Yang
HZHaoran Zhang
Haoran Zhang
Judy Wawira GichoyaJudy Wawira Gichoya
Judy Wawira Gichoya
DKDina Katabi
Dina Katabi
MGMarzyeh Ghassemi
Marzyeh Ghassemi
As artificial intelligence (AI) rapidly approaches human-level performance in medical imaging, it is crucial that it does not exacerbate or propagate healthcare disparities. Previous research established AI’s capacity to infer demographic data from chest X-rays, leading to a key concern: do models using demographic shortcuts have unfair predictions across subpopulations? In this study, we conducted a thorough investigation into the extent to which medical AI uses demographic encodings, focusing on potential fairness discrepancies within both in-distribution training sets and external test sets. Our analysis covers three key medical imaging disciplines—radiology, dermatology and ophthalmology—and incorporates data from six global chest X-ray datasets. We confirm that medical imaging AI leverages demographic shortcuts in disease classification. Although correcting shortcuts algorithmically effectively addresses fairness gaps to create ‘locally optimal’ models within the original data distribution, this optimality is not true in new test settings. Surprisingly, we found that models with less encoding of demographic attributes are often most ‘globally optimal’, exhibiting better fairness during model evaluation in new test environments. Our work establishes best practices for medical imaging models that maintain their performance and fairness in deployments beyond their initial training contexts, underscoring critical considerations for AI clinical deployments across populations and sites.

1 November 2019 in Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JGJ. Raymond Geis
J. Raymond Geis
ABAdrian P. Brady
Adrian P. Brady
CWCarol C. Wu
Carol C. Wu
JSJack Spencer
Jack Spencer
ERErik Ranschaert
Erik Ranschaert
MKMarc Kohli
Marc Kohli
This statement highlights our consensus that ethical use of AI in radiology should promote well-being, minimize harm, and ensure that the benefits and harms are distributed among stakeholders in a ... This is a condensed summary of an international multisociety statement on ethics of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiology produced by the ACR, European Society of Radiology, RSNA, Society for I...

12 November 2021 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
AYAdam Yala
Adam Yala
PMPeter G. Mikhael
Peter G. Mikhael
FSFredrik Strand
Fredrik Strand
Gigin LinGigin Lin
Gigin Lin
SSSiddharth Satuluru
Siddharth Satuluru
RBRegina Barzilay
Regina Barzilay
PURPOSE: Accurate risk assessment is essential for the success of population screening programs in breast cancer. Models with high sensitivity and specificity would enable programs to target more elaborate screening efforts to high-risk populations, while minimizing overtreatment for the rest. Artificial intelligence (AI)-based risk models have demonstrated a significant advance over risk models used today in clinical practice. However, the responsible deployment of novel AI requires careful validation across diverse populations. To this end, we validate our AI-based model, Mirai, across globally diverse screening populations. METHODS: We collected screening mammograms and pathology-confirmed breast cancer outcomes from Massachusetts General Hospital, USA; Novant, USA; Emory, USA; Maccabi-Assuta, Israel; Karolinska, Sweden; Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan; and Barretos, Brazil. We evaluated Uno's concordance index for Mirai in predicting risk of breast cancer at one to five years from the mammogram. RESULTS: A total of 128,793 mammograms from 62,185 patients were collected across the seven sites, of which 3,815 were followed by a cancer diagnosis within 5 years. Mirai obtained concordance indices of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.78), 0.75 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.80), 0.77 (95% CI, 0.75 to 0.79), 0.77 (95% CI, 0.73 to 0.81), 0.81 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.82), 0.79 (95% CI, 0.76 to 0.83), and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.81 to 0.88) at Massachusetts General Hospital, Novant, Emory, Maccabi-Assuta, Karolinska, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, and Barretos, respectively. CONCLUSION: Mirai, a mammography-based risk model, maintained its accuracy across globally diverse test sets from seven hospitals across five countries. This is the broadest validation to date of an AI-based breast cancer model and suggests that the technology can offer broad and equitable improvements in care.

27 July 2023 in Journal of the American College of Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
IBImon Banerjee
Imon Banerjee
KBKamanasish Bhattacharjee
Kamanasish Bhattacharjee
JBJohn L. Burns
John L. Burns
HTHari Trivedi
Hari Trivedi
SPSaptarshi Purkayastha
Saptarshi Purkayastha
Judy Wawira GichoyaJudy Wawira Gichoya
Judy Wawira Gichoya