Assessing the Impact of Case Correction Methods on the Fairness of COVID-19 Predictive Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.10355v1
• Date: Thu, 16 May 2024 16:26:21 GMT
• Title: Assessing the Impact of Case Correction Methods on the Fairness of COVID-19 Predictive Models
• Authors: Daniel Smolyak, Saad Abrar, Naman Awasthi, Vanessa Frias-Martinez,
• Abstract summary: Two case correction methods are investigated for their impact on a COVID-19 case prediction task. One of the correction methods improves fairness, decreasing differences in performance between majority-White and majority-minority counties. While these results are mixed, it is evident that correction methods have the potential to exacerbate existing biases in COVID-19 case data.
• Score: 0.24999074238880484
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: One of the central difficulties of addressing the COVID-19 pandemic has been accurately measuring and predicting the spread of infections. In particular, official COVID-19 case counts in the United States are under counts of actual caseloads due to the absence of universal testing policies. Researchers have proposed a variety of methods for recovering true caseloads, often through the estimation of statistical models on more reliable measures, such as death and hospitalization counts, positivity rates, and demographics. However, given the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on marginalized racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups, it is important to consider potential unintended effects of case correction methods on these groups. Thus, we investigate two of these correction methods for their impact on a downstream COVID-19 case prediction task. For that purpose, we tailor an auditing approach and evaluation protocol to analyze the fairness of the COVID-19 prediction task by measuring the difference in model performance between majority-White counties and majority-minority counties. We find that one of the correction methods improves fairness, decreasing differences in performance between majority-White and majority-minority counties, while the other method increases differences, introducing bias. While these results are mixed, it is evident that correction methods have the potential to exacerbate existing biases in COVID-19 case data and in downstream prediction tasks. Researchers planning to develop or use case correction methods must be careful to consider negative effects on marginalized groups.

Related papers

• Auditing the Fairness of COVID-19 Forecast Hub Case Prediction Models [0.24999074238880484]
  The COVID-19 Forecast Hub is used by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for their official COVID-19 communications. By focusing exclusively on prediction accuracy, the Forecast Hub fails to evaluate whether the proposed models have similar performance across social determinants. We show statistically significant predictive performance across social determinants, with minority racial and ethnic groups as well as less urbanized areas often associated with higher prediction errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-17T21:07:19Z)
• DemOpts: Fairness corrections in COVID-19 case prediction models [0.24999074238880484]
  We show that state of the art deep learning models output mean prediction errors that are significantly different across racial and ethnic groups. We propose a novel de-biasing method, DemOpts, to increase the fairness of deep learning based forecasting models trained on potentially biased datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-15T16:22:46Z)
• Systematic Evaluation of Predictive Fairness [60.0947291284978]
  Mitigating bias in training on biased datasets is an important open problem. We examine the performance of various debiasing methods across multiple tasks. We find that data conditions have a strong influence on relative model performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-17T05:40:13Z)
• Treatment Effect Risk: Bounds and Inference [58.442274475425144]
  Since the average treatment effect measures the change in social welfare, even if positive, there is a risk of negative effect on, say, some 10% of the population. In this paper we consider how to nonetheless assess this important risk measure, formalized as the conditional value at risk (CVaR) of the ITE distribution. Some bounds can also be interpreted as summarizing a complex CATE function into a single metric and are of interest independently of being a bound.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-15T17:21:26Z)
• Identifying and mitigating bias in algorithms used to manage patients in a pandemic [4.756860520861679]
  Logistic regression models were created to predict COVID-19 mortality, ventilator status and inpatient status using a real-world dataset. Models showed a 57% decrease in the number of biased trials. After calibration, the average sensitivity of the predictive models increased from 0.527 to 0.955.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-30T21:10:56Z)
• Comparative Analysis of Machine Learning Approaches to Analyze and Predict the Covid-19 Outbreak [10.307715136465056]
  We present a comparative analysis of various machine learning (ML) approaches in predicting the COVID-19 outbreak in the epidemiological domain. The results reveal the advantages of ML algorithms for supporting decision making of evolving short term policies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-11T11:57:33Z)
• Bayesian prognostic covariate adjustment [59.75318183140857]
  Historical data about disease outcomes can be integrated into the analysis of clinical trials in many ways. We build on existing literature that uses prognostic scores from a predictive model to increase the efficiency of treatment effect estimates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-24T05:19:03Z)
• Increasing the efficiency of randomized trial estimates via linear adjustment for a prognostic score [59.75318183140857]
  Estimating causal effects from randomized experiments is central to clinical research. Most methods for historical borrowing achieve reductions in variance by sacrificing strict type-I error rate control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-17T21:10:10Z)
• STELAR: Spatio-temporal Tensor Factorization with Latent Epidemiological Regularization [76.57716281104938]
  We develop a tensor method to predict the evolution of epidemic trends for many regions simultaneously. STELAR enables long-term prediction by incorporating latent temporal regularization through a system of discrete-time difference equations. We conduct experiments using both county- and state-level COVID-19 data and show that our model can identify interesting latent patterns of the epidemic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-08T21:21:47Z)
• Curse of Small Sample Size in Forecasting of the Active Cases in COVID-19 Outbreak [0.0]
  During the COVID-19 pandemic, a massive number of attempts on the predictions of the number of cases and the other future trends of this pandemic have been made. However, they fail to predict, in a reliable way, the medium and long term evolution of fundamental features of COVID-19 outbreak within acceptable accuracy. This paper gives an explanation for the failure of machine learning models in this particular forecasting problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-06T23:13:34Z)
• An Investigation of Why Overparameterization Exacerbates Spurious Correlations [98.3066727301239]
  We identify two key properties of the training data that drive this behavior. We show how the inductive bias of models towards "memorizing" fewer examples can cause over parameterization to hurt.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-09T01:59:13Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.