The paper evaluates machine learning models that predict retention and premature discontinuation in medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Using the Treatment Episode Data Set-Discharges (TEDS‑D) from 2015‑2019, the authors trained four models and examined overall performance as well as subgroup error rates by race, ethnicity, age, and sex. They also tested bias‑mitigation techniques, finding that these can reduce but not eliminate performance gaps without harming predictive accuracy.
arXiv:2607. 08953v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Algorithmic fairness methods are increasingly used to identify and mitigate bias in machine learning models, yet most approaches are evaluated in isolation and along single demographic axes.
arXiv:2512.19735v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Accurately predicting mortality risk in intensive care unit (ICU) patients is critical for clinical decision-making. Large language models (LLMs) a...
Algorithmic fairness methods are increasingly used to identify and mitigate bias in machine learning models, yet most approaches are evaluated in isolation and along single demographic axes. This limits practical guidance for selecting fairness strategies, where disparities may arise across intersectional subgroups and across multiple stages of the modeling lifecycle.
The paper examines how fairness conclusions in ICU mortality prediction using MIMIC-IV depend on the choice of metrics and the granularity of demographic analysis. It compares predictive-utility and subgroup-error metrics across various fairness interventions and introduces a lightweight adaptation strategy that balances ethnicity, gender, and insurance representation without conditioning on mortality outcomes. The study finds that different interventions can be evaluated differently across accuracy, sensitivity, and false-positive rate, and that marginal demographic summaries may hide heterogeneous error patterns within intersectional subgroups.
arXiv:2604. 16450v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Intersectional biases in healthcare data can produce compound disparities in clinical machine learning models, yet most fairness evaluations assess demographic attributes independently.
arXiv:2505. 16941v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Foundation models (FMs) promise to address core limitations of traditional supervised machine learning: (i) reliance on large amounts of labeled data, (ii) task specificity, and (iii) poor transportability.
arXiv:2609.40108v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Opioid overdose remains a major clinical and public health burden, highlighting the need for scalable approaches to identify patients at high risk. Her...
FairGlucose is a 300‑patient CGM cohort balanced across 12 demographic strata, providing 132,480 forecasting samples and 3,945 behavioral events. Benchmarking 33 models on 2‑hour glucose forecasting revealed that population‑level validation masks significant subgroup disparities, with error ratios ranging from 0.8 to 1.4 and T1D patients experiencing 6 mg/dL higher error than T2D. The study shows that these gaps persist across all models, align with clinically hard cases, and vary with input‑length sensitivity, underscoring the need for subgroup‑disaggregated reporting in digital health AI.
arXiv:2608. 05203v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Machine learning models achieve strong predictive accuracy for 90-day outcome prediction in acute ischaemic stroke, yet clinical adoption is limited by the misalignment of model explanations with clinicians' reasoning.
arXiv:2607. 21806v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Predictive machine learning (ML) models are increasingly used to aid human decision-makers across various high-risk domains such as healthcare and criminal justice.
arXiv:2608. 12477v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Clinical prediction models are often developed as if the outcome of interest were cleanly observed for every patient.
arXiv:2606. 05797v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Longitudinal treatment decisions require predicting potential outcomes under future treatment sequences in the presence of time-varying confounding, heterogeneous patient dynamics, and limited domain-specific data.