Abstract:With the current ongoing debate about fairness, explainability and transparency of machine learning models, their application in high-impact clinical decision-making systems must be scrutinized. We consider a real-life example of risk estimation before surgery and investigate the potential for bias or unfairness of a variety of algorithms. Our approach creates transparent documentation of potential bias so that the users can apply the model carefully. We augment a model-card like analysis using propensity scores with a decision-tree based guide for clinicians that would identify predictable shortcomings of the model. In addition to functioning as a guide for users, we propose that it can guide the algorithm development and informatics team to focus on data sources and structures that can address these shortcomings.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

### What problems does this paper attempt to solve? This paper aims to explore and solve the fairness problem in postoperative complication prediction models. Specifically, the research team is concerned about the possible biases or unfairness that may occur when applying machine - learning models in high - impact clinical decision - support systems. By analyzing different algorithmic models, they attempt to identify whether these models have biases against certain groups when predicting postoperative complications and provide transparent documentation to help users apply these models cautiously. #### Main problems include: 1. **Identifying potential biases**: - Researchers used multiple machine - learning algorithms (such as decision trees, random forests, gradient boosting, logistic regression, and deep neural networks) to predict 30 - day mortality and acute kidney injury (AKI) after surgery and examined whether these models had unfair prediction results for different genders and ethnic groups. 2. **Evaluating different types of unfairness**: - This paper considered three main types of unfairness: disparate treatment, disparate impact, and disparate mistreatment. The focus was on disparate treatment and disparate mistreatment because they are more applicable to the application context of clinical decision - support systems. 3. **Proposing solutions**: - To address and prevent biases, researchers proposed a decision - tree - based guideline to help clinicians identify predictable flaws in the model. In addition, they also suggested reducing the model's unfairness by improving data collection and optimizing algorithm development. 4. **Transparency and educating users**: - Even if the bias cannot be completely eliminated, the researchers also emphasized the importance of transparently documenting the problem and providing detailed guidance for users so that they can be more cautious when applying the model. #### Specific research methods: - **Dataset and prediction tasks**: - Used electronic health record data from Barnes - Jewish Hospital at Washington University in St. Louis, covering adult patients who underwent endotracheal intubation surgery from June 2012 to August 2016. - **Sensitive features**: - Gender (male/female) and race (black/white) were selected as sensitive features for analysis. - **Performance evaluation**: - Evaluated the prediction performance of different models in each sub - group by calculating metrics such as the false negative rate (FNR), false positive rate (FPR), false discovery rate (FDR), and false omission rate (FOR). #### Conclusion: This paper revealed important potential bias problems in postoperative complication prediction models and proposed methods to reduce these biases through transparency and improvement of data and algorithms. This not only helps to improve the fairness of the model but also ensures the reliability and effectiveness of clinical decision - support systems.

(Un)fairness in Post-operative Complication Prediction Models

Counterfactual Reasoning for Fair Clinical Risk Prediction

An Empirical Characterization of Fair Machine Learning For Clinical Risk Prediction

Reporting of Fairness Metrics in Clinical Risk Prediction Models: A Call for Change

Algorithmic fairness in artificial intelligence for medicine and healthcare

Fairness in the prediction of acute postoperative pain using machine learning models

Facing the Challenges of Developing Fair Risk Scoring Models

Explainable AI for Fair Sepsis Mortality Predictive Model

On (assessing) the fairness of risk score models

Algorithm Fairness in AI for Medicine and Healthcare

Fairness gaps in Machine learning models for hospitalization and emergency department visit risk prediction in home healthcare patients with heart failure

Identifying and mitigating bias in algorithms used to manage patients in a pandemic

Algorithmic fairness in computational medicine

Explainable AI for clinical risk prediction: a survey of concepts, methods, and modalities

Monitoring fairness in machine learning models that predict patient mortality in the ICU

Predicting serious postoperative complications and evaluating racial fairness in machine learning algorithms for metabolic and bariatric surgery

Counterfactual risk assessments, evaluation, and fairness

A Survey on Optimization and Machine Learning-Based Fair Decision Making in Healthcare

An intersectional framework for counterfactual fairness in risk prediction

Do the Machine Learning Models on a Crowd Sourced Platform Exhibit Bias? An Empirical Study on Model Fairness

Machine learning is more accurate and biased than risk scoring tools in the prediction of postoperative atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery