Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35396996›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2022

Assessing socioeconomic bias in machine learning algorithms in health care: a case study of the HOUSES index.

Young J Juhn, Euijung Ryu, Chung-Il Wi, Katherine S King, Momin Malik, Santiago Romero-Brufau, Chunhua Weng, Sunghwan Sohn, Richard R Sharp, John D Halamka

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 44 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Language Barriers and Other Determinants of Post-Intensive Care Unit Follow-Up: A 5-Year Review.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2026
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

10 authors.

Young J JuhnPrecision Population Science Lab, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Euijung RyuDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Chung-Il WiPrecision Population Science Lab, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Katherine S KingDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8043-9640
Momin MalikCenter for Digital Health, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4871-0429
Santiago Romero-BrufauDepartment of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9922-0083
Chunhua WengDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.
Sunghwan SohnDepartment of Artificial Intelligence and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Richard R SharpBiomedical Ethics Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
John D HalamkaCenter for Digital Health, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2305-6755

Funding

Identification and characterization of children with asthma-associated comorbidities through computational and immune phenotypingR01HL126667 · NHLBI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI JUHN, YOUNG J, LIU, HONGFANG · 2015 to 2022
$4.3M
Improving the Risk Adjustment Method for Quality Care Measures through Application of an Innovative Individual-Level Socioeconomic MeasureR21AG065639 · NIA · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI JUHN, YOUNG J · 2021 to 2022
$437k
Secondary use of EMR for residency training in asthma care and documentationR21AI142702 · NIAID · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI JUHN, YOUNG J, SOHN, SUNGHWAN · 2019 to 2020
$437k
NIAID NIH HHS R21 AI142702NIA NIH HHS R21 AG065639
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveArtificial intelligence (AI) models may propagate harmful biases in performance and hence negatively affect the underserved. We aimed to assess the degree to which data quality of electronic health records (EHRs) affected by inequities related to low socioeconomic status (SES), results in differential performance of AI models across SES. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis study utilized existing machine learning models for predicting asthma exacerbation in children with asthma. We compared balanced error rate (BER) against different SES levels measured by HOUsing-based SocioEconomic Status measure (HOUSES) index. As a possible mechanism for differential performance, we also compared incompleteness of EHR information relevant to asthma care by SES.

resultsAsthmatic children with lower SES had larger BER than those with higher SES (eg, ratio = 1.35 for HOUSES Q1 vs Q2-Q4) and had a higher proportion of missing information relevant to asthma care (eg, 41% vs 24% for missing asthma severity and 12% vs 9.8% for undiagnosed asthma despite meeting asthma criteria). DISCUSSION: Our study suggests that lower SES is associated with worse predictive model performance. It also highlights the potential role of incomplete EHR data in this differential performance and suggests a way to mitigate this bias.

conclusionThe HOUSES index allows AI researchers to assess bias in predictive model performance by SES. Although our case study was based on a small sample size and a single-site study, the study results highlight a potential strategy for identifying bias by using an innovative SES measure.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceAsthmaBiasChildDelivery of Health CareHumansMachine LearningSocial Classalgorithmic biasartificial intelligenceelectronic health recordsHOUSESsocial determinants of health

Identifiers

PMID35396996
PMCPMC9196683

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.