Dataset Information

Algorithmic fairness in pandemic forecasting: lessons from COVID-19.

ABSTRACT: Racial and ethnic minorities have borne a particularly acute burden of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. There is a growing awareness from both researchers and public health leaders of the critical need to ensure fairness in forecast results. Without careful and deliberate bias mitigation, inequities embedded in data can be transferred to model predictions, perpetuating disparities, and exacerbating the disproportionate harms of the COVID-19 pandemic. These biases in data and forecasts can be viewed through both statistical and sociological lenses, and the challenges of both building hierarchical models with limited data availability and drawing on data that reflects structural inequities must be confronted. We present an outline of key modeling domains in which unfairness may be introduced and draw on our experience building and testing the Google-Harvard COVID-19 Public Forecasting model to illustrate these challenges and offer strategies to address them. While targeted toward pandemic forecasting, these domains of potentially biased modeling and concurrent approaches to pursuing fairness present important considerations for equitable machine-learning innovation.

SUBMITTER: Tsai TC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9090910 | biostudies-literature | 2022 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Algorithmic fairness in pandemic forecasting: lessons from COVID-19.

Tsai Thomas C TC Arik Sercan S Jacobson Benjamin H BH Yoon Jinsung J Yoder Nate N Sava Dario D Mitchell Margaret M Graham Garth G Pfister Tomas T

NPJ digital medicine 20220510 1

Racial and ethnic minorities have borne a particularly acute burden of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. There is a growing awareness from both researchers and public health leaders of the critical need to ensure fairness in forecast results. Without careful and deliberate bias mitigation, inequities embedded in data can be transferred to model predictions, perpetuating disparities, and exacerbating the disproportionate harms of the COVID-19 pandemic. These biases in data and forecasts ...[more]

PMID: 35538215

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesStatistical and artificial intelligence algorithms are increasingly being developed for use in healthcare. These algorithms may reflect biases that magnify disparities in clinical care, and there is a growing need for understanding how algorithmic biases can be mitigated in pursuit of algorithmic fairness. We conducted a scoping review on algorithmic individual fairness (IF) to understand the current state of research in the metrics and methods developed to achieve IF and their applications in healthcare.Materials and methodsWe searched four databases: PubMed, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, and medRxiv for algorithmic IF metrics, algorithmic bias mitigation, and healthcare applications. Our search was restricted to articles published between January 2013 and November 2024. We identified 2498 articles through database searches and seven additional articles, of which 32 articles were included in the review. Data from the selected articles were extracted, and the findings were synthesized.ResultsBased on the 32 articles in the review, we identified several themes, including philosophical underpinnings of fairness, IF metrics, mitigation methods for achieving IF, implications of achieving IF on group fairness and vice versa, and applications of IF in healthcare.DiscussionWe find that research of IF is still in their early stages, particularly in healthcare, as evidenced by the limited number of relevant articles published between 2013 and 2024. While healthcare applications of IF remain sparse, growth has been steady in number of publications since 2012. The limitations of group fairness further emphasize the need for alternative approaches like IF. However, IF itself is not without challenges, including subjective definitions of similarity and potential bias encoding from data-driven methods. These findings, coupled with the limitations of the review process, underscore the need for more comprehensive research on the evolution of IF metrics and definitions to advance this promising field.ConclusionWhile significant work has been done on algorithmic IF in recent years, the definition, use, and study of IF remain in their infancy, especially in healthcare. Future research is needed to comprehensively apply and evaluate IF in healthcare.

Dataset Information

Algorithmic fairness in pandemic forecasting: lessons from COVID-19.

Publications

Algorithmic fairness in pandemic forecasting: lessons from COVID-19.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets