Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

The fairness paradox in public regulatory summaries of FDA-authorized artificial intelligence-enabled medical devices.

Created on 01 Sep 2026

Authors

Chun-Wang Lui, Pusheng Wang

Published in

Frontiers in medicine. Volume 13. Pages 1894905. Epub Aug 17, 2026.

Abstract

The U. S. Food and Drug Administration has published several types of public regulatory summaries of artificial intelligence-enabled medical devices, including 510(k) summaries, De Novo decision summaries, and premarket approval summaries of safety and effectiveness data. These documents are among the few regulatory texts routinely accessible to clinical institutions, patient advocates, educators, and researchers. Existing empirical audits have documented reporting deficits in areas such as demographic representation, model development details, and clinical validation data. This Perspective draws on these empirical findings and sociotechnical scholarship to formulate the saturation-gap paradox as a preliminary conceptual hypothesis requiring future empirical validation. It proposes that public summaries may be technically and procedurally detailed while providing only limited entry points for assessing fairness, clinical equity, and accountability. Rather than presenting a new systematic audit or inferring what FDA reviewers evaluated internally, this perspective focuses on the accessibility, structure, and accountability function of public disclosures. It considers three ways in which these disclosure genres may limit fairness scrutiny. These involve semantic abstraction, metricization and procedural governance, and accountability redistribution. Finally, building on this prioritized conceptual framework, this Perspective offers preliminary design propositions for disclosure reform and an illustrative TPACK-based educational outline as directions for future research, stakeholder consultation, and prospective development.

PMID:
42676419
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 01 Sep 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 8
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement