IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pdig00/0000033.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A systematic review of federated learning applications for biomedical data

Author

Listed:
  • Matthew G Crowson
  • Dana Moukheiber
  • Aldo Robles Arévalo
  • Barbara D Lam
  • Sreekar Mantena
  • Aakanksha Rana
  • Deborah Goss
  • David W Bates
  • Leo Anthony Celi

Abstract

Objectives: Federated learning (FL) allows multiple institutions to collaboratively develop a machine learning algorithm without sharing their data. Organizations instead share model parameters only, allowing them to benefit from a model built with a larger dataset while maintaining the privacy of their own data. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the current state of FL in healthcare and discuss the limitations and promise of this technology. Methods: We conducted a literature search using PRISMA guidelines. At least two reviewers assessed each study for eligibility and extracted a predetermined set of data. The quality of each study was determined using the TRIPOD guideline and PROBAST tool. Results: 13 studies were included in the full systematic review. Most were in the field of oncology (6 of 13; 46.1%), followed by radiology (5 of 13; 38.5%). The majority evaluated imaging results, performed a binary classification prediction task via offline learning (n = 12; 92.3%), and used a centralized topology, aggregation server workflow (n = 10; 76.9%). Most studies were compliant with the major reporting requirements of the TRIPOD guidelines. In all, 6 of 13 (46.2%) of studies were judged at high risk of bias using the PROBAST tool and only 5 studies used publicly available data. Conclusion: Federated learning is a growing field in machine learning with many promising uses in healthcare. Few studies have been published to date. Our evaluation found that investigators can do more to address the risk of bias and increase transparency by adding steps for data homogeneity or sharing required metadata and code. Author summary: Interest in machine learning as applied to challenges in medicine has seen an exponential rise over the past decade. A key issue in developing machine learning models is the availability of sufficient high-quality data. Another related issue is a requirement to validate a locally trained model on data from external sources. However, sharing sensitive biomedical and clinical data across different hospitals and research teams can be challenging due to concerns with data privacy and data stewardship. These issues have led to innovative new approaches for collaboratively training machine learning models without sharing raw data. One such method, termed ‘federated learning,’ enables investigators from different institutions to combine efforts by training a model locally on their own data, and sharing the parameters of the model with others to generate a central model. Here, we systematically review reports of successful deployments of federated learning applied to research problems involving biomedical data. We found that federated learning links research teams around the world and has been applied to modelling in such as oncology and radiology. Based on the trends we observed in the studies reviewed in our paper, we observe there are opportunities to expand and improve this innovative approach so global teams can continue to produce and validate high quality machine learning models.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthew G Crowson & Dana Moukheiber & Aldo Robles Arévalo & Barbara D Lam & Sreekar Mantena & Aakanksha Rana & Deborah Goss & David W Bates & Leo Anthony Celi, 2022. "A systematic review of federated learning applications for biomedical data," PLOS Digital Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 1(5), pages 1-14, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pdig00:0000033
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pdig.0000033
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pdig.0000033&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000033?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kenneth P Seastedt & Patrick Schwab & Zach O’Brien & Edith Wakida & Karen Herrera & Portia Grace F Marcelo & Louis Agha-Mir-Salim & Xavier Borrat Frigola & Emily Boardman Ndulue & Alvin Marcelo & Leo , 2022. "Global healthcare fairness: We should be sharing more, not less, data," PLOS Digital Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 1(10), pages 1-13, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pdig00:0000033. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: digitalhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.