Abstract
Background: Fair clinical prediction models are crucial for achieving equitable health outcomes. Recently, intersectionality has been applied to develop fairness algorithms that address discrimination among intersections of protected attributes (e.g., Black women rather than Black persons or women separately). Still, the majority of medical AI literature applies marginal de-biasing approaches, which constrain performance across one or many isolated patient attributes. We investigate the extent to which this modeling decision affects model equity and performance in a well-defined use case in emergency medicine. Methods: The study focused on predicting emergency room admissions using electronic health record data from two large U.S. hospitals, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (MIMIC-IV-ED, n=160,016) and Boston Children's Hospital (BCH, n=22,222), covering both adult and pediatric populations. In a comprehensive experiment over fairness definitions, modeling methods, we compared the performance of single- and multi-attribute, marginal de-biasing approaches to intersectional de-biasing approaches. Results: Intersectional de-biasing produces greater reductions in subgroup calibration error (MIMIC-IV: 21.2%; BCH: 27.2%) than marginal de-biasing (MIMIC-IV: 10.6%; BCH: 22.7%), and also lowers subgroup false negative rates on MIMIC-IV an additional 3.5% relative to marginal de-biasing. These fairness gains were achieved without a significant decrease in model accuracy between baseline and intersectionally-debiased models (MIMIC-IV: AUROC=0.85+-0.00, both models; BCH: AUROC=0.88+-0.01 vs 0.87+-0.01). Intersectional de-biasing more effectively lowered subgroup calibration error and FNRs in low-prevalence groups in both datasets compared to other de-biasing conditions. Conclusion: Intersectional de-biasing better mitigates performance disparities across intersecting groups compared to marginal approaches for emergency admission prediction. These strategies meaningfully reduce group-specific error rates without compromising overall accuracy. These findings highlight the importance of considering interacting aspects of patient identity in model development, and suggest that intersectional de-biasing would be a promising gold standard for ensuring equity in clinical prediction models.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was partially supported by National Institutes of Health grant no. R01LM014300 from the National Library of Medicine.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethics committee/IRB of Boston Children's Hospital gave ethical approval for this work
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
MIMIC-IV-ED is available from physionet.org/mimic-iv-ed. The full preprocessing code for the MIMIC-IV admissions dataset is available from the repository github.com/cavalab/mimic-iv-admissions. The BCH pediatric dataset is not publicly available under the terms of the BCH Institutional Review Board. Interested readers may contact the corresponding author for additional details.
