Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Assessing Phenotype Definitions for Algorithmic Fairness.
7
Zitationen
4
Autoren
2022
Jahr
Abstract
Phenotyping is a core, routine activity in observational health research. Cohorts impact downstream analyses, such as how a condition is characterized, how patient risk is defined, and what treatments are studied. It is thus critical to ensure that cohorts are representative of all patients, independently of their demographics or social determinants of health. In this paper, we propose a set of best practices to assess the fairness of phenotype definitions. We leverage established fairness metrics commonly used in predictive models and relate them to commonly used epidemiological metrics. We describe an empirical study for Crohn's disease and diabetes type 2, each with multiple phenotype definitions taken from the literature across gender and race. We show that the different phenotype definitions exhibit widely varying and disparate performance according to the different fairness metrics and subgroups. We hope that the proposed best practices can help in constructing fair and inclusive phenotype definitions.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
1986 · 38.733 Zit.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
2009 · 37.535 Zit.
PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation
2018 · 37.057 Zit.
The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
2011 · 33.449 Zit.
RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
2019 · 28.303 Zit.