Evaluating fairness of machine learning prediction of prolonged wait times in Emergency Department with Interpretable eXtreme gradient boosting.

PLOS digital health Pub Date : 2025-03-20 eCollection Date: 2025-03-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000751
Hao Wang, Nethra Sambamoorthi, Nathan Hoot, David Bryant, Usha Sambamoorthi
{"title":"Evaluating fairness of machine learning prediction of prolonged wait times in Emergency Department with Interpretable eXtreme gradient boosting.","authors":"Hao Wang, Nethra Sambamoorthi, Nathan Hoot, David Bryant, Usha Sambamoorthi","doi":"10.1371/journal.pdig.0000751","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>It is essential to evaluate performance and assess quality before applying artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) models to clinical practice. This study utilized ML to predict patient wait times in the Emergency Department (ED), determine model performance accuracies, and conduct fairness evaluations to further assess ethnic disparities in using ML for wait time prediction among different patient populations in the ED. This retrospective observational study included adult patients (age ≥18 years) in the ED (n=173,856 visits) who were assigned an Emergency Severity Index (ESI) level of 3 at triage. Prolonged wait time was defined as waiting time ≥30 minutes. We employed extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) for predicting prolonged wait times. Model performance was assessed with accuracy, recall, precision, F1 score, and false negative rate (FNR). To perform the global and local interpretation of feature importance, we utilized Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) to interpret the output from the XGBoost model. Fairness in ML models were evaluated across sensitive attributes (sex, race and ethnicity, and insurance status) at both subgroup and individual levels. We found that nearly half (48.43%, 84,195) of ED patient visits demonstrated prolonged ED wait times. XGBoost model exhibited moderate accuracy performance (AUROC=0.81). When fairness was evaluated with FNRs, unfairness existed across different sensitive attributes (male vs. female, Hispanic vs. Non-Hispanic White, and patients with insurances vs. without insurance). The predicted FNRs were lower among females, Hispanics, and patients without insurance compared to their counterparts. Therefore, XGBoost model demonstrated acceptable performance in predicting prolonged wait times in ED visits. However, disparities arise in predicting patients with different sex, race and ethnicity, and insurance status. To enhance the utility of ML model predictions in clinical practice, conducting performance assessments and fairness evaluations are crucial.</p>","PeriodicalId":74465,"journal":{"name":"PLOS digital health","volume":"4 3","pages":"e0000751"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11925291/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLOS digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000751","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

It is essential to evaluate performance and assess quality before applying artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) models to clinical practice. This study utilized ML to predict patient wait times in the Emergency Department (ED), determine model performance accuracies, and conduct fairness evaluations to further assess ethnic disparities in using ML for wait time prediction among different patient populations in the ED. This retrospective observational study included adult patients (age ≥18 years) in the ED (n=173,856 visits) who were assigned an Emergency Severity Index (ESI) level of 3 at triage. Prolonged wait time was defined as waiting time ≥30 minutes. We employed extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) for predicting prolonged wait times. Model performance was assessed with accuracy, recall, precision, F1 score, and false negative rate (FNR). To perform the global and local interpretation of feature importance, we utilized Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) to interpret the output from the XGBoost model. Fairness in ML models were evaluated across sensitive attributes (sex, race and ethnicity, and insurance status) at both subgroup and individual levels. We found that nearly half (48.43%, 84,195) of ED patient visits demonstrated prolonged ED wait times. XGBoost model exhibited moderate accuracy performance (AUROC=0.81). When fairness was evaluated with FNRs, unfairness existed across different sensitive attributes (male vs. female, Hispanic vs. Non-Hispanic White, and patients with insurances vs. without insurance). The predicted FNRs were lower among females, Hispanics, and patients without insurance compared to their counterparts. Therefore, XGBoost model demonstrated acceptable performance in predicting prolonged wait times in ED visits. However, disparities arise in predicting patients with different sex, race and ethnicity, and insurance status. To enhance the utility of ML model predictions in clinical practice, conducting performance assessments and fairness evaluations are crucial.

利用可解释的极值梯度增强评估机器学习预测急诊科等待时间延长的公平性。
在将人工智能(AI)和机器学习(ML)模型应用于临床实践之前,对性能和质量进行评估至关重要。本研究利用机器学习预测急诊科(ED)患者的等待时间,确定模型的性能准确性,并进行公平性评估,以进一步评估使用机器学习预测急诊科不同患者群体等待时间的种族差异。这项回顾性观察研究包括急诊室的成年患者(年龄≥18 岁)(173856 人次),这些患者在分诊时的急诊严重程度指数(ESI)级别为 3。等待时间过长是指等待时间≥30 分钟。我们采用极端梯度提升法(XGBoost)来预测延长的等待时间。模型性能通过准确率、召回率、精确度、F1 分数和假阴性率 (FNR) 进行评估。为了对特征重要性进行全局和局部解释,我们利用夏普利加法解释(SHAP)来解释 XGBoost 模型的输出。在亚组和个体层面,我们对不同敏感属性(性别、种族和民族以及保险状况)的 ML 模型的公平性进行了评估。我们发现,近一半(48.43%,84 195 例)的急诊室患者就诊时表现出急诊室等待时间过长。XGBoost 模型的准确性表现一般(AUROC=0.81)。用 FNR 评估公平性时,不同的敏感属性(男性与女性、西班牙裔与非西班牙裔白人、有保险与无保险患者)都存在不公平现象。女性、西班牙裔和无保险患者的预测 FNR 值低于同类患者。因此,XGBoost 模型在预测急诊室就诊等待时间过长方面表现出了可接受的性能。然而,在预测不同性别、种族和民族以及保险状况的患者时,会出现差异。为了提高 ML 模型预测在临床实践中的实用性,进行性能评估和公平性评价至关重要。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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