Missingness and algorithmic bias: an example from the United States National Outbreak Reporting System, 2009-2019.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Journal of Public Health Policy Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-03 DOI:10.1057/s41271-024-00477-2
Emily Diemer, Elena N Naumova
{"title":"Missingness and algorithmic bias: an example from the United States National Outbreak Reporting System, 2009-2019.","authors":"Emily Diemer, Elena N Naumova","doi":"10.1057/s41271-024-00477-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Growing debates about algorithmic bias in public health surveillance lack specific examples. We tested a common assumption that exposure and illness periods coincide and demonstrated how algorithmic bias can arise due to missingness of critical information related to illness and exposure durations. We examined 9407 outbreaks recorded by the United States National Outbreak Reporting System (NORS) from January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2019 and detected algorithmic bias, a systematic over- or under-estimation of foodborne disease outbreak (FBDO) durations due to missing start and end dates. For 7037 (75%) FBDOs with complete date-time information, ~ 60% reported that the exposure period ended before the illness period started. For 2079 (87.7%) FBDOs with missing exposure dates, average illness durations were ~ 5.3 times longer (p < 0.001) than those with complete information, prompting the potential for algorithmic bias. Modern surveillance systems must be equipped with investigative capacities to examine and assess structural data missingness that can lead to bias.</p>","PeriodicalId":50070,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Health Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41271-024-00477-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Growing debates about algorithmic bias in public health surveillance lack specific examples. We tested a common assumption that exposure and illness periods coincide and demonstrated how algorithmic bias can arise due to missingness of critical information related to illness and exposure durations. We examined 9407 outbreaks recorded by the United States National Outbreak Reporting System (NORS) from January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2019 and detected algorithmic bias, a systematic over- or under-estimation of foodborne disease outbreak (FBDO) durations due to missing start and end dates. For 7037 (75%) FBDOs with complete date-time information, ~ 60% reported that the exposure period ended before the illness period started. For 2079 (87.7%) FBDOs with missing exposure dates, average illness durations were ~ 5.3 times longer (p < 0.001) than those with complete information, prompting the potential for algorithmic bias. Modern surveillance systems must be equipped with investigative capacities to examine and assess structural data missingness that can lead to bias.

漏报与算法偏差:以 2009-2019 年美国国家疫情报告系统为例。
关于公共卫生监测中算法偏差的争论越来越多,但缺乏具体的实例。我们检验了暴露期和发病期相吻合这一常见假设,并证明了算法偏差是如何因遗漏与发病和暴露期相关的关键信息而产生的。我们研究了美国国家疫情报告系统(NORS)从 2009 年 1 月 1 日到 2019 年 12 月 31 日记录的 9407 起疫情,发现了算法偏差,即由于开始和结束日期的缺失,系统性地高估或低估了食源性疾病疫情(FBDO)的持续时间。在有完整日期-时间信息的 7037 例(75%)FBDO 中,约 60% 报告暴露期在发病期开始前结束。在 2079 个(87.7%)缺少暴露日期的 FBDO 中,平均疾病持续时间约为前者的 5.3 倍(p<0.05)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Public Health Policy
Journal of Public Health Policy 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
2.60%
发文量
62
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Public Health Policy (JPHP) will continue its 35 year tradition: an accessible source of scholarly articles on the epidemiologic and social foundations of public health policy, rigorously edited, and progressive. JPHP aims to create a more inclusive public health policy dialogue, within nations and among them. It broadens public health policy debates beyond the ''health system'' to examine all forces and environments that impinge on the health of populations. It provides an exciting platform for airing controversy and framing policy debates - honing policies to solve new problems and unresolved old ones. JPHP welcomes unsolicited original scientific and policy contributions on all public health topics. New authors are particularly encouraged to enter debates about how to improve the health of populations and reduce health disparities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信