A machine learning model for predicting, diagnosing, and mitigating health disparities in hospital readmission
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The management of hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients has a significant impact on both morbidity and mortality. Therefore, it is important to predict the need for diabetic patients to be hospitalized. However, using standard machine learning approaches to make these predictions may result in health disparities caused by biases in the data related to social determinants (such as race, age, and gender). These biases must be removed early in the data collection process, before they enter the system and are reinforced by model predictions, resulting in biases in the model’s decisions. In this paper, we propose a machine learning pipeline capable of making predictions as well as detecting and mitigating biases in the data and model predictions. This pipeline analyses the clinical data and determines whether biases exist in the data, if so, it removes those biases before making predictions. We evaluate the performance of the proposed method on a clinical dataset using accuracy and fairness measures. The findings of the results show that when we mitigate biases early during the data ingestion, we get fairer predictions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it