ArticleIEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering2026
Adversarial Debiasing for Equitable and Fair Detection of Acute Coronary Syndrome Using 12-Lead ECG.
Article in IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveAcute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a life-threatening condition requiring accurate diagnosis for better outcomes. However, variability in signs and symptoms among racial subgroups could cause disparities in diagnostic accuracy. In this study, we use machine learning models to diagnose ACS, focusing on mitigating disparities and ensuring fairness between Black and non-Black populations.
methodsWe built on a state-of-the-art random forest classifier to compare three mitigation strategies. The first two approaches involved resampling or partitioning the data prior to training, while the third approach proposed an innovative framework called adversarial debiasing. To evaluate our model performance, we used the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and an operating point at 80% specificity for clinical importance.
resultsAfter mitigation with adversarial debiasing, the difference in sensitivities between the two subgroups decreased from 9.8% to 1.3%. Specifically, this approach achieved areas under the ROC of 0.810 and 0.817, and sensitivities of 70.1% and 71.4%, respectively for Black and non-Black subgroups.
conclusionThe proposed adversarial debiasing model outperformed the other two methods in both diagnostic accuracy and effectiveness in minimizing disparities. SIGNIFICANCE: We expect this framework to achieve fair diagnostic models across diverse demographic populations globally and be generalizable to other outcomes.
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.