• LOGIN
    Login with username and password
Repository logo

BORIS Portal

Bern Open Repository and Information System

  • Publications
  • Theses
  • Research Data
  • Projects
  • Organizations
  • Researchers
  • More
  • Collections
  • Statistics
  • LOGIN
    Login with username and password
Repository logo
Unibern.ch
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. Algorithmic fairness in precision psychiatry: analysis of prediction models in individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis.
 

Algorithmic fairness in precision psychiatry: analysis of prediction models in individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis.

Options
  • Details
  • Files
BORIS DOI
10.48350/188685
Publisher DOI
10.1192/bjp.2023.141
PubMed ID
37936347
Description
BACKGROUND

Computational models offer promising potential for personalised treatment of psychiatric diseases. For their clinical deployment, fairness must be evaluated alongside accuracy. Fairness requires predictive models to not unfairly disadvantage specific demographic groups. Failure to assess model fairness prior to use risks perpetuating healthcare inequalities. Despite its importance, empirical investigation of fairness in predictive models for psychiatry remains scarce.

AIMS

To evaluate fairness in prediction models for development of psychosis and functional outcome.

METHOD

Using data from the PRONIA study, we examined fairness in 13 published models for prediction of transition to psychosis (n = 11) and functional outcome (n = 2) in people at clinical high risk for psychosis or with recent-onset depression. Using accuracy equality, predictive parity, false-positive error rate balance and false-negative error rate balance, we evaluated relevant fairness aspects for the demographic attributes 'gender' and 'educational attainment' and compared them with the fairness of clinicians' judgements.

RESULTS

Our findings indicate systematic bias towards assigning less favourable outcomes to individuals with lower educational attainment in both prediction models and clinicians' judgements, resulting in higher false-positive rates in 7 of 11 models for transition to psychosis. Interestingly, the bias patterns observed in algorithmic predictions were not significantly more pronounced than those in clinicians' predictions.

CONCLUSIONS

Educational bias was present in algorithmic and clinicians' predictions, assuming more favourable outcomes for individuals with higher educational level (years of education). This bias might lead to increased stigma and psychosocial burden in patients with lower educational attainment and suboptimal psychosis prevention in those with higher educational attainment.
Date of Publication
2024-02
Publication Type
Article
Subject(s)
600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health
Keyword(s)
Ethics psychotic disorders/schizophrenia risk assessment schizophrenia stigma and discrimination
Language(s)
en
Contributor(s)
Şahin, Derya
Kambeitz-Ilankovic, Lana
Wood, Stephen
Dwyer, Dominic
Upthegrove, Rachel
Salokangas, Raimo
Borgwardt, Stefan
Brambilla, Paolo
Meisenzahl, Eva
Ruhrmann, Stephan
Schultze-Lutter, Frauke
Forschungsabteilung Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie
Universitätsklinik für Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie und Psychotherapie (KJP)
Lencer, Rebekka
Bertolino, Alessandro
Pantelis, Christos
Koutsouleris, Nikolaos
Kambeitz, Joseph
Additional Credits
Forschungsabteilung Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie
Series
The British journal of psychiatry
Publisher
Cambridge University Press
ISSN
1472-1465
Access(Rights)
restricted
Show full item
BORIS Portal
Bern Open Repository and Information System
Build: dd892c [ 9.04. 8:30]
Explore
  • Projects
  • Funding
  • Publications
  • Research Data
  • Organizations
  • Researchers
  • Audiovisual Material
  • Software & other digital items
  • Events
More
  • About BORIS Portal
  • Send Feedback
  • Cookie settings
  • Service Policy
Follow us on
  • Mastodon
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
UniBe logo