Net benefit, calibration, threshold selection, and training objectives for algorithmic fairness in healthcare
A growing body of work uses the paradigm of algorithmic fairness to frame the development of techniques to anticipate and proactively mitigate the introduction or exacerbation of health inequities that may follow from the use of model-guided decision-making. We evaluate the interplay between measures of model performance, fairness, and the expected utility of decision-making to offer practical recommendations for the operationalization of algorithmic fairness principles for the development and evaluation of predictive models in healthcare. We conduct an empirical case-study via development of models to estimate the ten-year risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease to inform statin initiation in accordance with clinical practice guidelines. We demonstrate that approaches that incorporate fairness considerations into the model training objective typically do not improve model performance or confer greater net benefit for any of the studied patient populations compared to the use of standard learning paradigms followed by threshold selection concordant with patient preferences, evidence of intervention effectiveness, and model calibration. These results hold when the measured outcomes are not subject to differential measurement error across patient populations and threshold selection is unconstrained, regardless of whether differences in model performance metrics, such as in true and false positive error rates, are present. In closing, we argue for focusing model development efforts on developing calibrated models that predict outcomes well for all patient populations while emphasizing that such efforts are complementary to transparent reporting, participatory design, and reasoning about the impact of model-informed interventions in context.
Code (1)
Tasks
Decision MakingFairnessSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Lightweight Baselines for Medical Abstract Classification: DistilBERT with Cross-Entropy as a Strong Default
The research evaluates lightweight medical abstract classification methods to establish their maximum performance capabilities under financial budget restrictions. On the public medical abstracts corpus, we finetune BERT…
Goal-Oriented Lower-Tail Calibration of Gaussian Processes for Bayesian Optimization
Bayesian optimization (BO) selects evaluation points for expensive black-box objectives using Gaussian process (GP) predictive distributions. Kernel choice and hyperparameter selection can lead to miscalibrated predictiv…
Gaussian ProcessesGeneralizable Diabetes Risk Stratification via Hybrid Machine Learning Models
Background/Purpose: Diabetes affects over 537 million people worldwide and is projected to reach 783 million by 2045. Early risk stratification can benefit from machine learning. We compare two hybrid classifiers and ass…
When Single-Dataset Conclusions Fail: A 45-Task Study of Threshold Tuning and Resampling for Imbalanced Classification
Class-imbalance handling is routinely evaluated on a single benchmark dataset, and the resulting conclusions are reported as if they were properties of the method. We show this practice is unsafe. On the public Kaggle cr…
Community-aware evaluation and threshold calibration for open-set plankton image recognition
Automated plankton image recognition is increasingly used in aquatic ecosystem monitoring, but deployed classifiers inevitably encounter unseen taxa and non-target particles. Open-set recognition methods are usually eval…