Abstract
Clinical risk prediction models integrated in digitized healthcare systems hold promise for personalized primary prevention and care. Fairness metrics are important tools for evaluating potential disparities across sensitive features in the field of prediction modeling. In this paper, we seek to assess the uptake of fairness metrics in clinical risk prediction modeling by conducting a scoping literature review of recent high impact publications in the areas of cardiovascular disease and COVID-19. Our review shows that fairness metrics have rarely been used in clinical risk prediction modeling despite their ability to identify inequality and flag potential discrimination. We also find that the data used in clinical risk prediction models remain largely demographically homogeneous, demonstrating an urgent need for collecting and using data from diverse populations. To address these issues, we suggest specific strategies for increasing the use of fairness metrics while developing clinical risk prediction models.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported through grant DMS1712933 from the National Science Foundation and MI-CARES grant 1UG3CA267907 from the National Cancer Institute. The funders had no role in the design of the study; collection, analysis, or interpretation of the data; writing of the report; or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All materials used for this review can be accessed via GitHub.
