Pith. sign in

REVIEW

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

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2111.00340 v1 pith:SPH5YP6J submitted 2021-10-30 cs.LG cs.CY

classification cs.LGcs.CY
keywords modelsbiascovid-19predictivetrainingadjustmentsnaivelysimple
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Numerous COVID-19 clinical decision support systems have been developed. However many of these systems do not have the merit for validity due to methodological shortcomings including algorithmic bias. Methods Logistic regression models were created to predict COVID-19 mortality, ventilator status and inpatient status using a real-world dataset consisting of four hospitals in New York City and analyzed for biases against race, gender and age. Simple thresholding adjustments were applied in the training process to establish more equitable models. Results Compared to the naively trained models, the calibrated models showed a 57% decrease in the number of biased trials, while predictive performance, measured by area under the receiver/operating curve (AUC), remained unchanged. After calibration, the average sensitivity of the predictive models increased from 0.527 to 0.955. Conclusion We demonstrate that naively training and deploying machine learning models on real world data for predictive analytics of COVID-19 has a high risk of bias. Simple implemented adjustments or calibrations during model training can lead to substantial and sustained gains in fairness on subsequent deployment.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools