ArticleJournal of electrocardiology
Age, sex and race bias in automated arrhythmia detectors.
Article in Journal of electrocardiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of machine learning for lung cancer survival prognostication-A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2024Pooled it
- AI-Driven Atrial Fibrillation Management: From Signal to Strategy.Balkan medical journal · 2026Review
- Strategies for mitigating artificial intelligence bias in healthcare: a systematic review.JAMIA open · 2026Review
- Dataset effects outweigh algorithmic effects in determining fairness of healthcare machine learning.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Prescreening depression using wearable electrocardiogram and photoplethysmogram data from a psycholinguistic experiment.Physiological measurement · 2025Article
- Bias Mitigation in Primary Health Care Artificial Intelligence Models: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Large Language Models for Wearable Sensor-Based Human Activity Recognition, Health Monitoring, and Behavioral Modeling: A Survey of Early Trends, Datasets, and Challenges.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Evaluating and mitigating unfairness in multimodal remote mental health assessments.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Despite the recent explosion of machine learning applied to medical data, very few studies have examined algorithmic bias in any meaningful manner, comparing across algorithms, databases, and assessment metrics. In this study, we compared the biases in sex, age, and race of 56 algorithms on over 130,000 electrocardiograms (ECGs) using several metrics and propose a machine learning model design to reduce bias. Participants of the 2021 PhysioNet Challenge designed and implemented working, open-source algorithms to identify clinical diagnosis from 2- lead ECG recordings. We grouped the data from the training, validation, and test datasets by sex (male vs female), age (binned by decade), and race (Asian, Black, White, and Other) whenever possible. We computed recording-wise accuracy, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), area under the precision recall curve (AUPRC), F-measure, and the Challenge Score for each of the 56 algorithms. The Mann-Whitney U and the Kruskal-Wallis tests assessed the performance differences of algorithms across these demographic groups. Group trends revealed similar values for the AUROC, AUPRC, and F-measure for both male and female groups across the training, validation, and test sets. However, recording-wise accuracies were 20% higher (p < 0.01) and the Challenge Score 12% lower (p = 0.02) for female subjects on the test set. AUPRC, F-measure, and the Challenge Score increased with age, while recording-wise accuracy and AUROC decreased with age. The results were similar for the training and test sets, but only recording-wise accuracy (12% decrease per decade, p < 0.01), Challenge Score (1% increase per decade, p < 0.01), and AUROC (1% decrease per decade, p < 0.01) were statistically different on the test set. We observed similar AUROC, AUPRC, Challenge Score, and F-measure values across the different race categories. But, recording-wise accuracies were significantly lower for Black subjects and higher for Asian subjects on the training (31% difference, p < 0.01) and test (39% difference, p < 0.01) sets. A top performing model was then retrained using an additional constraint which simultaneously minimized differences in performance across sex, race and age. This resulted in a modest reduction in performance, with a significant reduction in bias. This work provides a demonstration that biases manifest as a function of model architecture, population, cost function and optimization metric, all of which should be closely examined in any model.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.