Adversarial Debiasing for Equitable and Fair Detection of Acute Coronary Syndrome Using 12-Lead ECG
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a life-threatening condition requiring accurate diagnosis for better outcomes. However, variability in signs and symptoms among racial subgroups could cause disparities in diagnostic accuracy. In this study, we use machine learning models to diagnose ACS, focusing on mitigating disparities and ensuring fairness between Black and non-Black populations. METHODS: We built on a state-of-the-art random forest classifier to compare three mitigation strategies. The first two approaches involved resampling or partitioning the data prior to training, while the third approach proposed an innovative framework called adversarial debiasing. To evaluate our model performance, we used the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and an operating point at 80% specificity for clinical importance. RESULTS: After mitigation with adversarial debiasing, the difference in sensitivities between the two subgroups decreased from 9.8% to 1.3%. Specifically, this approach achieved areas under the ROC of 0.810 and 0.817, and sensitivities of 70.1% and 71.4%, respectively for Black and non-Black subgroups. CONCLUSION: The proposed adversarial debiasing model outperformed the other two methods in both diagnostic accuracy and effectiveness in minimizing disparities. SIGNIFICANCE: We expect this framework to achieve fair diagnostic models across diverse demographic populations globally and be generalizable to other outcomes.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".