Fair Foundation Models for Medical Image Analysis: Challenges and Perspectives

Ensuring equitable Artificial Intelligence (AI) in healthcare demands systems that make unbiased decisions across all demographic groups, bridging technical innovation with ethical principles. Foundation Models (FMs), trained on vast datasets through self-supervised learning, enable efficient adaptation across medical imaging tasks while reducing dependency on labeled data. These models demonstrate potential for enhancing fairness, though significant challenges remain in achieving consistent performance across demographic groups. Our review indicates that effective bias mitigation in FMs requires systematic interventions throughout all stages of development. While previous approaches focused primarily on model-level bias mitigation, our analysis reveals that fairness in FMs requires integrated interventions throughout the development pipeline, from data documentation to deployment protocols. This comprehensive framework advances current knowledge by demonstrating how systematic bias mitigation, combined with policy engagement, can effectively address both technical and institutional barriers to equitable AI in healthcare. The development of equitable FMs represents a critical step toward democratizing advanced healthcare technologies, particularly for underserved populations and regions with limited medical infrastructure and computational resources.

Does Data-Efficient Generalization Exacerbate Bias in Foundation Models?

Foundation models have emerged as robust models with label efficiency in diverse domains. In medical imaging, these models contribute to the advancement of medical diagnoses due to the difficulty in obtaining labeled data. However, it is unclear whether using a large amount of unlabeled data, biased by the presence of sensitive attributes during pre-training, influences the fairness of the model. This research examines the bias in the Foundation model (RetFound) when it is applied to fine-tune the Brazilian Multilabel Ophthalmological Dataset (BRSET), which has a different population than the pre-training dataset. The model evaluation, in comparison with supervised learning, shows that the Foundation Model has the potential to reduce the gap between the maximum AUC and minimum AUC evaluations across gender and age groups. However, in a data-efficient generalization, the model increases the bias when the data amount decreases. These findings suggest that when deploying a Foundation Model in real-life scenarios with limited data, the possibility of fairness issues should be considered.