14.3LGFeb 17, 2023
On (assessing) the fairness of risk score modelsEike Petersen, Melanie Ganz, Sune Hannibal Holm et al.
Recent work on algorithmic fairness has largely focused on the fairness of discrete decisions, or classifications. While such decisions are often based on risk score models, the fairness of the risk models themselves has received considerably less attention. Risk models are of interest for a number of reasons, including the fact that they communicate uncertainty about the potential outcomes to users, thus representing a way to enable meaningful human oversight. Here, we address fairness desiderata for risk score models. We identify the provision of similar epistemic value to different groups as a key desideratum for risk score fairness. Further, we address how to assess the fairness of risk score models quantitatively, including a discussion of metric choices and meaningful statistical comparisons between groups. In this context, we also introduce a novel calibration error metric that is less sample size-biased than previously proposed metrics, enabling meaningful comparisons between groups of different sizes. We illustrate our methodology - which is widely applicable in many other settings - in two case studies, one in recidivism risk prediction, and one in risk of major depressive disorder (MDD) prediction.
1.2CYFeb 27
How Meta-research Can Pave the Road Towards Trustworthy AI In Healthcare: Catalogue of Ideas and Roadmap for Future ResearchValerie Bürger, Marlie Besouw, Jana Fehr et al.
Meta-research and Trustworthy AI (TAI) share common goals, namely improving evidence, robustness, and transparency, yet there is very little interplay between the two fields. To investigate the potential benefits of closer collaboration between the domains of TAI in healthcare and meta-research, we convened an interdisciplinary workshop funded by the Volkswagen Foundation in February 2025. The workshop aimed to collaboratively examine key tensions in translating AI ethics principles into practice and to identify potential solutions informed by meta-research approaches. A Design Thinking-informed co-creation approach was followed by an inductive descriptive analysis of the outputs. Our results demonstrate how meta-research can offer concrete contributions to address pressing challenges of TAI in healthcare. These challenges include achieving robustness, reproducibility, and replicability; late-stage development and the integration of AI into clinical practice; the selection of appropriate evaluation metrics; specific AI-related challenges in preclinical and biomedical research; gaps of transparency in medical AI, as well as the need for improved conceptual clarity and AI literacy among stakeholders. Finally, we offer a catalog of ideas and roadmap for future research to inform scholars in both fields on existing interconnections and serve as a foundation for guiding future interdisciplinary efforts.