EDAI Framework for Integrating Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Throughout the Lifecycle of AI to Improve Health and Oral Health Care: Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent studies have identified significant gaps in equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) considerations within the lifecycle of artificial intelligence (AI), spanning from data collection and problem definition to implementation stages. Despite the recognized need for integrating EDI principles, there is currently no existing guideline or framework to support this integration in the AI lifecycle. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to address this gap by identifying EDI principles and indicators to be integrated into the AI lifecycle. The goal was to develop a comprehensive guiding framework to guide the development and implementation of future AI systems. METHODS: This study was conducted in 3 phases. In phase 1, a comprehensive systematic scoping review explored how EDI principles have been integrated into AI in health and oral health care settings. In phase 2, a multidisciplinary team was established, and two 2-day, in-person international workshops with over 60 representatives from diverse backgrounds, expertise, and communities were conducted. The workshops included plenary presentations, round table discussions, and focused group discussions. In phase 3, based on the workshops' insights, the EDAI framework was developed and refined through iterative feedback from participants. The results of the initial systematic scoping review have been published separately, and this paper focuses on subsequent phases of the project, which is related to framework development. RESULTS: In this study, we developed the EDAI framework, a comprehensive guideline that integrates EDI principles and indicators throughout the entire AI lifecycle. This framework addresses existing gaps at various stages, from data collection to implementation, and focuses on individual, organizational, and systemic levels. Additionally, we identified both the facilitators and barriers to integrating EDI within the AI lifecycle in health and oral health care. CONCLUSIONS: The developed EDAI framework provides a comprehensive, actionable guideline for integrating EDI principles into AI development and deployment. By facilitating the systematic incorporation of these principles, the framework supports the creation and implementation of AI systems that are not only technologically advanced but also sensitive to EDI principles.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.107 | 0.067 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".