Abstract:Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms can be applied in breast cancer risk prediction and prevention by using patient history, scans, imaging information, and analysis of specific genes for cancer classification to reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment. This scoping review aimed to identify the barriers encountered in applying innovative AI techniques and models in developing breast cancer risk prediction scores and promoting screening behaviors among adult females. Findings may inform and guide future global recommendations for AI application in breast cancer prevention and care for female populations. Methods: The PRISMA-SCR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) was used as a reference checklist throughout this study. The Arksey and O'Malley methodology was used as a framework to guide this review. The framework methodology consisted of five steps: (1) Identify research questions; (2) Search for relevant studies; (3) Selection of studies relevant to the research questions; (4) Chart the data; (5) Collate, summarize, and report the results. Results: In the field of breast cancer risk detection and prevention, the following AI techniques and models have been applied: Machine and Deep Learning Model (ML-DL model) (n = 1), Academic Algorithms (n = 2), Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC), Clinical 5-Year Risk Prediction Model (n = 2), deep-learning computer vision AI algorithms (n = 2), AI-based thermal imaging solution (Thermalytix) (n = 1), RealRisks (n = 2), Breast Cancer Risk NAVIgation (n = 1), MammoRisk (ML-Based Tool) (n = 1), Various MLModels (n = 1), and various machine/deep learning, decision aids, and commercial algorithms (n = 7). In the 11 included studies, a total of 39 barriers to AI applications in breast cancer risk prediction and screening efforts were identified. The most common barriers in the application of innovative AI tools for breast cancer prediction and improved screening rates included lack of external validity and limited generalizability (n = 6), as AI was used in studies with either a small sample size or datasets with missing data. Many studies (n = 5) also encountered selection bias due to exclusion of certain populations based on characteristics such as race/ethnicity, family history, or past medical history. Several recommendations for future research should be considered. AI models need to include a broader spectrum and more complete predictive variables for risk assessment. Investigating long-term outcomes with improved follow-up periods is critical to assess the impacts of AI on clinical decisions beyond just the immediate outcomes. Utilizing AI to improve communication strategies at both a local and organizational level can assist in informed decision-making and compliance, especially in populations with limited literacy levels. Conclusions: The use of AI in patient education and as an adjunctive tool for providers is still early in its incorporation, and future research should explore the implementation of AI-driven resources to enhance understanding and decision-making regarding breast cancer screening, especially in vulnerable populations with limited literacy.

A Clinician's Guide to Understanding Bias in Critical Clinical Prediction Models

Sources of bias in artificial intelligence that perpetuate healthcare disparities—A global review

Unmasking bias in artificial intelligence: a systematic review of bias detection and mitigation strategies in electronic health record-based models

Factors influencing clinician and patient interaction with machine learning-based risk prediction models: a systematic review

Explainable AI for clinical risk prediction: a survey of concepts, methods, and modalities

Unmasking Bias in AI: A Systematic Review of Bias Detection and Mitigation Strategies in Electronic Health Record-based Models

Identifying and mitigating bias in algorithms used to manage patients in a pandemic

TRIPOD+AI statement: updated guidance for reporting clinical prediction models that use regression or machine learning methods

Implications of Bias in Artificial Intelligence: Considerations for Cardiovascular Imaging

From Data to Decisions: How AI Is Revolutionizing Clinical Prediction Models in Plastic Surgery

A clinician's guide to understanding and critically appraising machine learning studies: a checklist for Ruling Out Bias Using Standard Tools in Machine Learning (ROBUST-ML)

An ethics assessment tool for artificial intelligence implementation in healthcare: CARE-AI

Evaluation of clinical prediction models (part 1): from development to external validation

AI pitfalls and what not to do: mitigating bias in AI

Implications of the Use of Artificial Intelligence Predictive Models in Health Care Settings : A Simulation Study

Evaluating gender bias in ML-based clinical risk prediction models: A study on multiple use cases at different hospitals

(Un)fairness in Post-operative Complication Prediction Models

Advancing Fairness in Cardiac Care: Strategies for Mitigating Bias in Artificial Intelligence Models within Cardiology

AI-based diabetes care: risk prediction models and implementation concerns

Bias in artificial intelligence for medical imaging: fundamentals, detection, avoidance, mitigation, challenges, ethics, and prospects

Promoting Artificial Intelligence for Global Breast Cancer Risk Prediction and Screening in Adult Women: A Scoping Review