Clin Chem. 2026 Feb 2:hvag001. doi: 10.1093/clinchem/hvag001. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) augmented laboratory tests can improve quality, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and staff satisfaction. However, the clinical success of these tests can introduce unforeseen challenges for model retraining. This study describes the discovery of an “AI label feedback loop” in a clinically implemented AI-augmented kidney stone composition test.

METHODS: An AI-augmented kidney stone composition test (V1) has been previously deployed for clinical kidney stone characterization. After several years of clinical use, a retrained model (V2) was developed using 6 times more data. Model performance of both V1 and V2 were evaluated across 3 datasets: a recent production validation (hold-out) set (mostly AI-influenced labels), the original V1 validation set (pre-AI, entirely human-labeled), and a subset of recent cases with exclusively human-generated or human-corrected labels.

RESULTS: V2 demonstrated a 10% lower concordance rate than V1 when evaluated on the recent production hold-out set, despite a much larger training dataset. Performance between V1 and V2 was similar when applied to the pre-AI validation set. Notably, V2 outperformed V1 on the recent subset of cases with human-only or human-corrected labels, particularly for less-common stone types. These findings revealed an AI label feedback loop, confounding retraining and evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS: The integration of AI into clinical practice can potentially influence reported test results, complicating the development and evaluation of future models. To mitigate AI label feedback loops, ongoing human annotation and careful validation set construction are essential. These strategies can ensure reliable performance assessment and support the safe evolution of clinical AI systems.

PMID:41627192 | DOI:10.1093/clinchem/hvag001