Abstract:Background: Fair clinical prediction models are crucial for achieving equitable health outcomes. Recently, intersectionality has been applied to develop fairness algorithms that address discrimination among intersections of protected attributes (e.g., Black women rather than Black persons or women separately). Still, the majority of medical AI literature applies marginal de-biasing approaches, which constrain performance across one or many isolated patient attributes. We investigate the extent to which this modeling decision affects model equity and performance in a well-defined use case in emergency medicine. Methods: The study focused on predicting emergency room admissions using electronic health record data from two large U.S. hospitals, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (MIMIC-IV-ED, n=160,016) and Boston Children's Hospital (BCH, n=22,222), covering both adult and pediatric populations. In a comprehensive experiment over fairness definitions, modeling methods, we compared the performance of single- and multi-attribute, marginal de-biasing approaches to intersectional de-biasing approaches. Results: Intersectional de-biasing produces greater reductions in subgroup calibration error (MIMIC-IV: 21.2%; BCH: 27.2%) than marginal de-biasing (MIMIC-IV: 10.6%; BCH: 22.7%), and also lowers subgroup false negative rates on MIMIC-IV an additional 3.5% relative to marginal de-biasing. These fairness gains were achieved without a significant decrease in model accuracy between baseline and intersectionally-debiased models (MIMIC-IV: AUROC=0.85+-0.00, both models; BCH: AUROC=0.88+-0.01 vs 0.87+-0.01). Intersectional de-biasing more effectively lowered subgroup calibration error and FNRs in low-prevalence groups in both datasets compared to other de-biasing conditions. Conclusion: Intersectional de-biasing better mitigates performance disparities across intersecting groups compared to marginal approaches for emergency admission prediction. These strategies meaningfully reduce group-specific error rates without compromising overall accuracy. These findings highlight the importance of considering interacting aspects of patient identity in model development, and suggest that intersectional de-biasing would be a promising gold standard for ensuring equity in clinical prediction models.

Mitigating allocative tradeoffs and harms in an environmental justice data tool

Potential for allocative harm in an environmental justice data tool

An Algorithmic Equity Toolkit for Technology Audits by Community Advocates and Activists

Popular Support for Balancing Equity and Efficiency in Resource Allocation: A Case Study in Online Advertising to Increase Welfare Program Awareness

Algorithm-Assisted Decision Making and Racial Disparities in Housing: A Study of the Allegheny Housing Assessment Tool

Heterogeneity in Algorithm-Assisted Decision-Making: A Case Study in Child Abuse Hotline Screening

Targeting disparate spaces: new technology and old tools

Developing the health effect assessment of landscape (HEAL) Tool: Assessing the health effects of community greenspace morphology design on non-communicable diseases

Algorithmic Harms in Child Welfare: Uncertainties in Practice, Organization, and Street-level Decision-Making

Community- and data-driven homelessness prevention and service delivery: optimizing for equity

The Impact of Differential Feature Under-reporting on Algorithmic Fairness

Visualizing Environmental Justice Issues in Urban Areas with a Community-based Approach

Impact on Public Health Decision Making by Utilizing Big Data Without Domain Knowledge

Assessing Algorithmic Fairness with Unobserved Protected Class Using Data Combination

Algorithmic Risk Assessments Can Alter Human Decision-Making Processes in High-Stakes Government Contexts

Participation and Division of Labor in User-Driven Algorithm Audits: How Do Everyday Users Work together to Surface Algorithmic Harms?

Intersectional consequences for marginal fairness in prediction models of emergency admissions

Testing the Fairness-Accuracy Improvability of Algorithms

Designing Equitable Algorithms

De-Biasing the Bias: Methods for Improving Disparity Assessments with Noisy Group Measurements

ML4EJ: Decoding the Role of Urban Features in Shaping Environmental Injustice Using Interpretable Machine Learning