ArticleCureus2023
Racial Equity in Healthcare Machine Learning: Illustrating Bias in Models With Minimal Bias Mitigation.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recommended guidelines concerning artificial intelligence and health equity: a scoping review.Health affairs scholar · 2026Review
- Assessing the effect of race on machine learning models predicting hospital admissions from emergency department.JAMIA open · 2026Article
- Leveraging imperfection with MEDLEY: a multi-model approach harnessing bias in medical AI.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- The Perceived Roles of AI in Clinical Practice: National Survey of 941 Academic Physicians.JMIR AI · 2025Article
- Using a Multilingual AI Care Agent to Reduce Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening for Higher Fecal Immunochemical Test Adoption Among Spanish-Speaking Patients: Retrospective Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Machine Learning for Mental Health: Applications, Challenges, and the Clinician's Role.Current psychiatry reports · 2024Review
- Enhancing neuro-oncology care through equity-driven applications of artificial intelligence.Neuro-oncology · 2024Review
- Artificial Intelligence to Promote Racial and Ethnic Cardiovascular Health Equity.Current cardiovascular risk reports · 2024Article
- Conceptualizing bias in EHR data: A case study in performance disparities by demographic subgroups for a pediatric obesity incidence classifier.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Racial Differences in Accuracy of Predictive Models for High-Flow Nasal Cannula Failure in COVID-19.Critical care explorations · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective While the potential of machine learning (ML) in healthcare to positively impact human health continues to grow, the potential for inequity in these methods must be assessed. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the presence of racial bias when five of the most common ML algorithms are used to create models with minimal processing to reduce racial bias. Methods By utilizing a CDC public database, we constructed models for the prediction of healthcare access (binary variable). Using area under the curve (AUC) as our performance metric, we calculated race-specific performance comparisons for each ML algorithm. We bootstrapped our entire analysis 20 times to produce confidence intervals for our AUC performance metrics. Results With the exception of only a few cases, we found that the performance for the White group was, in general, significantly higher than that of the other racial groups across all ML algorithms. Additionally, we found that the most accurate algorithm in our modeling was Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) followed by random forest, naive Bayes, support vector machine (SVM), and k-nearest neighbors (KNN). Conclusion Our study illustrates the predictive perils of incorporating minimal racial bias mitigation in ML models, resulting in predictive disparities by race. This is particularly concerning in the setting of evidence for limited bias mitigation in healthcare-related ML. There needs to be more conversation, research, and guidelines surrounding methods for racial bias assessment and mitigation in healthcare-related ML models, both those currently used and those in development.
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.