Towards Transparency in Dermatology Image Datasets with Skin Tone Annotations by Experts, Crowds, and an Algorithm
Matthew Groh, Caleb Harris, Roxana Daneshjou, Omar Badri, Arash, Koochek

TL;DR
This paper evaluates methods for annotating skin tone in dermatology images, finding crowd-based annotations reliable and proposing dynamic consensus protocols to improve dataset transparency.
Contribution
It compares expert and crowd annotation methods for skin tone, demonstrating crowd methods' reliability and introducing dynamic consensus protocols for dataset annotation.
Findings
Crowd annotations are as reliable as expert annotations.
ITA-FST method is less correlated with expert annotations.
Dynamic consensus protocols enhance transparency and reliability.
Abstract
While artificial intelligence (AI) holds promise for supporting healthcare providers and improving the accuracy of medical diagnoses, a lack of transparency in the composition of datasets exposes AI models to the possibility of unintentional and avoidable mistakes. In particular, public and private image datasets of dermatological conditions rarely include information on skin color. As a start towards increasing transparency, AI researchers have appropriated the use of the Fitzpatrick skin type (FST) from a measure of patient photosensitivity to a measure for estimating skin tone in algorithmic audits of computer vision applications including facial recognition and dermatology diagnosis. In order to understand the variability of estimated FST annotations on images, we compare several FST annotation methods on a diverse set of 460 images of skin conditions from both textbooks and online…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
