From Awareness to Action: Understanding and Overcoming the Research-Practice Gap in Algorithmic Fairness for Public Health

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.11214v1
• Date: Sat, 02 May 2026 10:00:21 GMT
• Title: From Awareness to Action: Understanding and Overcoming the Research-Practice Gap in Algorithmic Fairness for Public Health
• Abstract summary: Algorithmic fairness is essential for responsible ML-driven public health research, yet its practical implementation remains limited.<n>We conduct a sequential mixed-methods study comprising expert interviews, an online survey, and systematic mapping.<n>Our analysis shows that fairness remains weakly institutionalized, translation mechanisms are externally driven, and system-level priorities continue to emphasize accuracy over fairness.
• Score: 3.4137115855910767
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Algorithmic fairness is essential for responsible ML-driven public health research, yet its practical implementation remains limited. To investigate this awareness-action gap, we conducted a sequential mixed-methods study comprising expert interviews, an online survey, and systematic mapping. The expert interviews informed the design of the survey, which in turn revealed fragmented definitions of fairness, limited training and guidance, reliance on external sources, and rare use of formal assessment, mitigation, or monitoring. These findings were subsequently mapped onto three established research-practice gap lenses: the Knowledge-Practice Gap, the Knowledge-to-Action Cycle, and the Knowing-Doing Gap, each offering complementary perspectives. Building on this synthesis, we introduce the Fairness-to-Action framework, which integrates methodological, organizational, and systemic dimensions to identify where translation of algorithmic fairness knowledge stalls. Our analysis shows that fairness remains weakly institutionalized, translation mechanisms are externally driven, and system-level priorities continue to emphasize accuracy over fairness. These insights suggest critical leverage points for advancing safe, fair, and ethical ML-driven public health research practice.

Related papers

• Fairness Hazard Analysis for Socio-Technical Processes: A Multiple-Case Study in Bias-sensitive Organisational Settings [7.448292619884597]
  Fairness is recognised as a first-class requirement in socio-technical processes.<n>If left unaddressed, fairness hazards may accumulate and reinforce systemic bias.<n>This paper contributes a structured and empirically validated methodology for integrating fairness considerations in requirements engineering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-24T08:37:29Z)
• Trade-offs Between Individual and Group Fairness in Machine Learning: A Comprehensive Review [0.0]
  Group Fairness (GF) focuses on mitigating disparities across demographic subpopulations, and Individual Fairness (IF) emphasizes consistent treatment of similar individuals.<n>This survey examines methods that jointly address GF and IF, integrating both perspectives within unified frameworks.<n>We provide a systematic and critical review of hybrid fairness approaches, organizing existing methods according to the fairness mechanisms they employ and the algorithmic and mathematical strategies used to reconcile multiple fairness criteria.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-23T19:25:38Z)
• Responsible Evaluation of AI for Mental Health [72.85175110624736]
  Current approaches to evaluating AI tools in mental health care are fragmented and poorly aligned with clinical practice, social context, and first-hand user experience.<n>This paper argues for a rethinking of responsible evaluation by introducing an interdisciplinary framework that integrates clinical soundness, social context, and equity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-20T12:55:10Z)
• Machine Learning and Public Health: Identifying and Mitigating Algorithmic Bias through a Systematic Review [3.4137115855910767]
  Algorithmic bias in machine learning (ML) may inadvertently reinforce existing health disparities.<n>We present a systematic literature review of algorithmic bias identification, discussion, and reporting in Dutch public health ML research from 2021 to 2025.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-16T13:24:11Z)
• Partial Identification Approach to Counterfactual Fairness Assessment [50.88100567472179]
  We introduce a Bayesian approach to bound unknown counterfactual fairness measures with high confidence.<n>Our results reveal a positive (spurious) effect on the COMPAS score when changing race to African-American (from all others) and a negative (direct causal) effect when transitioning from young to old age.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-30T18:35:08Z)
• Fairness in Federated Learning: Fairness for Whom? [4.276697874428501]
  We argue that existing approaches tend to optimize narrow system level metrics, while overlooking how harms arise throughout the FL lifecycle.<n>Our analysis reveals five recurring pitfalls: 1) fairness framed solely through the lens of server client architecture, 2) a mismatch between simulations and motivating use-cases and contexts, 3) definitions that conflate protecting the system with protecting its users, 4) interventions that target isolated stages of the lifecycle while upstream and downstream effects, 5) and a lack of multi-stakeholder alignment where multiple fairness definitions can be relevant at once.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T10:41:19Z)
• Understanding Fairness in Recommender Systems: A Healthcare Perspective [0.18416014644193066]
  This paper explores the public's comprehension of fairness in healthcare recommendations. We conducted a survey where participants selected from four fairness metrics. Results suggest that a one-size-fits-all approach to fairness may be insufficient.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-05T19:59:42Z)
• Privacy for Fairness: Information Obfuscation for Fair Representation Learning with Local Differential Privacy [26.307780067808565]
  This study introduces a theoretical framework that enables a comprehensive examination of the interplay between privacy and fairness. We shall develop and analyze an information bottleneck (IB) based information obfuscation method with local differential privacy (LDP) for fair representation learning. In contrast to many empirical studies on fairness in ML, we show that the incorporation of LDP randomizers during the encoding process can enhance the fairness of the learned representation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-16T06:35:10Z)
• Exploring Federated Unlearning: Review, Comparison, and Insights [101.64910079905566]
  federated unlearning enables the selective removal of data from models trained in federated systems.<n>This paper examines existing federated unlearning approaches, examining their algorithmic efficiency, impact on model accuracy, and effectiveness in preserving privacy.<n>We propose the OpenFederatedUnlearning framework, a unified benchmark for evaluating federated unlearning methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-30T01:34:33Z)
• Causal Fairness Analysis [68.12191782657437]
  We introduce a framework for understanding, modeling, and possibly solving issues of fairness in decision-making settings. The main insight of our approach will be to link the quantification of the disparities present on the observed data with the underlying, and often unobserved, collection of causal mechanisms. Our effort culminates in the Fairness Map, which is the first systematic attempt to organize and explain the relationship between different criteria found in the literature.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-23T01:06:34Z)
• Fair Machine Learning in Healthcare: A Review [90.22219142430146]
  We analyze the intersection of fairness in machine learning and healthcare disparities. We provide a critical review of the associated fairness metrics from a machine learning standpoint. We propose several new research directions that hold promise for developing ethical and equitable ML applications in healthcare.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-29T04:32:10Z)
• Uncertainty as a Form of Transparency: Measuring, Communicating, and Using Uncertainty [66.17147341354577]
  We argue for considering a complementary form of transparency by estimating and communicating the uncertainty associated with model predictions. We describe how uncertainty can be used to mitigate model unfairness, augment decision-making, and build trustworthy systems. This work constitutes an interdisciplinary review drawn from literature spanning machine learning, visualization/HCI, design, decision-making, and fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-15T17:26:14Z)

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.