Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35211742›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2022

Observability and its impact on differential bias for clinical prediction models.

Mengying Yan, Michael J Pencina, L Ebony Boulware, Benjamin A Goldstein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Enhancing Clinical Decision Support in Nephrology: Addressing Algorithmic Bias Through Artificial Intelligence Governance.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Health Equity in Clinical Research Informatics.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2023
    Review
  10. A framework for the oversight and local deployment of safe and high-quality prediction models.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Mengying YanDepartment of Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Michael J PencinaDepartment of Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
L Ebony BoulwareDepartment of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Benjamin A GoldsteinDepartment of Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.

Funding

Predictive Analytics in Hemodialysis: Enabling Precision Care for Patient with ESKDR01DK123062 · NIDDK · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI GOLDSTEIN, BENJAMIN ALAN · 2020 to 2023
$2.6M
Data HarmonizationR61NS120246 · NINDS · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI PENCINA, MICHAEL J · 2020 to 2022
$2.0M
NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK123062NINDS NIH HHS R61 NS120246
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveElectronic health records have incomplete capture of patient outcomes. We consider the case when observability is differential across a predictor. Including such a predictor (sensitive variable) can lead to algorithmic bias, potentially exacerbating health inequities. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe define bias for a clinical prediction model (CPM) as the difference between the true and estimated risk, and differential bias as bias that differs across a sensitive variable. We illustrate the genesis of differential bias via a 2-stage process, where conditional on having the outcome of interest, the outcome is differentially observed. We use simulations and a real-data example to demonstrate the possible impact of including a sensitive variable in a CPM.

resultsIf there is differential observability based on a sensitive variable, including it in a CPM can induce differential bias. However, if the sensitive variable impacts the outcome but not observability, it is better to include it. When a sensitive variable impacts both observability and the outcome no simple recommendation can be provided. We show that one cannot use observed data to detect differential bias. DISCUSSION: Our study furthers the literature on observability, showing that differential observability can lead to algorithmic bias. This highlights the importance of considering whether to include sensitive variables in CPMs.

conclusionIncluding a sensitive variable in a CPM depends on whether it truly affects the outcome or just the observability of the outcome. Since this cannot be distinguished with observed data, observability is an implicit assumption of CPMs.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalBiasHumansPrognosisalgorithmic biasclinical prediction modelselectronic health recordhealth equityobservability

Identifiers

PMID35211742
PMCPMC9006687

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.