NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.
Abstract
Objectives:
To examine the evidence on whether and how healthcare algorithms (including algorithm-informed decision tools) exacerbate, perpetuate, or reduce racial and ethnic disparities in access to healthcare, quality of care, and health outcomes, and examine strategies that mitigate racial and ethnic bias in the development and use of algorithms.
Data sources:
We searched published and grey literature for relevant studies published between January 2011 and February 2023. Based on expert guidance, we determined that earlier articles are unlikely to reflect current algorithms. We also hand-searched reference lists of relevant studies and reviewed suggestions from experts and stakeholders.
Review methods:
Searches identified 11,500 unique records. Using predefined criteria and dual review, we screened and selected studies to assess one or both Key Questions (KQs): (1) the effect of algorithms on racial and ethnic disparities in health and healthcare outcomes and (2) the effect of strategies or approaches to mitigate racial and ethnic bias in the development, validation, dissemination, and implementation of algorithms. Outcomes of interest included access to healthcare, quality of care, and health outcomes. We assessed studies’ methodologic risk of bias (ROB) using the ROBINS-I tool and piloted an appraisal supplement to assess racial and ethnic equity-related ROB. We completed a narrative synthesis and cataloged study characteristics and outcome data. We also examined four Contextual Questions (CQs) designed to explore the context and capture insights on practical aspects of potential algorithmic bias. CQ 1 examines the problem’s scope within healthcare. CQ 2 describes recently emerging standards and guidance on how racial and ethnic bias can be prevented or mitigated during algorithm development and deployment. CQ 3 explores stakeholder awareness and perspectives about the interaction of algorithms and racial and ethnic disparities in health and healthcare. We addressed these CQs through supplemental literature reviews and conversations with experts and key stakeholders. For CQ 4, we conducted an in-depth analysis of a sample of six algorithms that have not been widely evaluated before in the published literature to better understand how their design and implementation might contribute to disparities.
Results:
Fifty-eight studies met inclusion criteria, of which three were included for both KQs. One study was a randomized controlled trial, and all others used cohort, pre-post, or modeling approaches. The studies included numerous types of clinical assessments: need for intensive care or high-risk care management; measurement of kidney or lung function; suitability for kidney or lung transplant; risk of cardiovascular disease, stroke, lung cancer, prostate cancer, postpartum depression, or opioid misuse; and warfarin dosing. We found evidence suggesting that algorithms may: (a) reduce disparities (i.e., revised Kidney Allocation System, prostate cancer screening tools); (b) perpetuate or exacerbate disparities (e.g., estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] for kidney function measurement, cardiovascular disease risk assessments); and/or (c) have no effect on racial or ethnic disparities. Algorithms for which mitigation strategies were identified are included in KQ 2. We identified six types of strategies often used to mitigate the potential of algorithms to contribute to disparities: removing an input variable; replacing a variable; adding one or more variables; changing or diversifying the racial and ethnic composition of the patient population used to train or validate a model; creating separate algorithms or thresholds for different populations; and modifying the statistical or analytic techniques used by an algorithm. Most mitigation efforts improved proximal outcomes (e.g., algorithmic calibration) for targeted populations, but it is more challenging to infer or extrapolate effects on longer term outcomes, such as racial and ethnic disparities. The scope of racial and ethnic bias related to algorithms and their application is difficult to quantify, but it clearly extends across the spectrum of medicine. Regulatory, professional, and corporate stakeholders are undertaking numerous efforts to develop standards for algorithms, often emphasizing the need for transparency, accountability, and representativeness.
Conclusions:
Algorithms have been shown to potentially perpetuate, exacerbate, and sometimes reduce racial and ethnic disparities. Disparities were reduced when race and ethnicity were incorporated into an algorithm to intentionally tackle known racial and ethnic disparities in resource allocation (e.g., kidney transplant allocation) or disparities in care (e.g., prostate cancer screening that historically led to Black men receiving more low-yield biopsies). It is important to note that in such cases the rationale for using race and ethnicity was clearly delineated and did not conflate race and ethnicity with ancestry and/or genetic predisposition. However, when algorithms include race and ethnicity without clear rationale, they may perpetuate the incorrect notion that race is a biologic construct and contribute to disparities. Finally, some algorithms may reduce or perpetuate disparities without containing race and ethnicity as an input. Several modeling studies showed that applying algorithms out of context of original development (e.g., illness severity scores used for crisis standards of care) could perpetuate or exacerbate disparities. On the other hand, algorithms may also reduce disparities by standardizing care and reducing opportunities for implicit bias (e.g., Lung Allocation Score for lung transplantation). Several mitigation strategies have been shown to potentially reduce the contribution of algorithms to racial and ethnic disparities. Results of mitigation efforts are highly context specific, relating to unique combinations of algorithm, clinical condition, population, setting, and outcomes. Important future steps include increasing transparency in algorithm development and implementation, increasing diversity of research and leadership teams, engaging diverse patient and community groups in the development to implementation lifecycle, promoting stakeholder awareness (including patients) of potential algorithmic risk, and investing in further research to assess the real-world effect of algorithms on racial and ethnic disparities before widespread implementation.
Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Key Informants
- Technical Expert Panel
- Peer Reviewers
- Executive Summary
- 1. Introduction
- 2. Methods
- 3. Results
- 3.1. Overview
- 3.2. Key Question 1. What is the effect of healthcare algorithms on racial and ethnic differences in access to care, quality of care, and health outcomes?
- 3.3. Key Question 2. What is the effect of interventions, models of interventions, or other approaches to mitigate racial and ethnic bias in the development, validation, dissemination, and implementation of healthcare algorithms?
- 3.4. Contextual Question 1. How widespread is the inclusion of input variables based on race and ethnicity in healthcare algorithms?
- 3.5. Contextual Question 2. What are existing and emerging national or international standards or guidance for how algorithms should be developed, validated, implemented, and updated to avoid introducing bias that could lead to health and healthcare disparities?
- 3.6. Contextual Question 3. To what extent are patients, providers (e.g., clinicians, hospitals, health systems), payers (e.g., insurers, employers), and policymakers (e.g., healthcare and insurance regulators, State Medicaid directors) aware of the inclusion of input variables based on race and ethnicity in healthcare algorithms?
- 3.7. Contextual Question 4. Select a sample of approximately 5–10 healthcare algorithms that have the potential to impact racial and ethnic disparities in access to care, quality of care, or health outcomes and are not included in KQs 1 or 2. For each algorithm, describe the type of algorithm, its purpose (e.g., screening, risk prediction, diagnosis), its developer and intended end-users, affected patient population, clinical condition or process of care, healthcare setting, and information on outcomes, if available.
- 4. Discussion
- References
- Abbreviations and Acronyms
- Appendixes
Kelley Tipton, M.P.H., and Brian F. Leas, M.S., M.A. (Co-Leads)
Suggested citation:
Tipton K, Leas BF, Flores E, Jepson C, Aysola J, Cohen J, Harhay M, Schmidt H, Weissman G, Treadwell J, Mull NK, Siddique SM. Impact of Healthcare Algorithms on Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health and Healthcare. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 268. (Prepared by the ECRI-Penn Medicine Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 75Q80120D00002.) AHRQ Publication No. 24-EHC004. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; December 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23970/AHRQEPCCER268. Posted final reports are located on the Effective Health Care Program search page.
This report is based on research conducted by the ECRI-Penn Medicine Evidence-based Practice Center under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. 75Q80120D00002). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its contents; the findings and conclusions do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. Therefore, no statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
None of the investigators have any affiliations or financial involvement that conflicts with the material presented in this report.
The information in this report is intended to help healthcare decision makers—patients and clinicians, health system leaders, and policymakers, among others—make well-informed decisions and thereby improve the quality of healthcare services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for the application of clinical judgment. Anyone who makes decisions concerning the provision of clinical care should consider this report in the same way as any medical reference and in conjunction with all other pertinent information, i.e., in the context of available resources and circumstances presented by individual patients.
This report is made available to the public under the terms of a licensing agreement between the author and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Most AHRQ documents are publicly available to use for noncommercial purposes (research, clinical or patient education, quality improvement projects) in the United States, and do not need specific permission to be reprinted and used unless they contain material that is copyrighted by others. Specific written permission is needed for commercial use (reprinting for sale, incorporation into software, incorporation into for-profit training courses) or for use outside of the U.S. If organizational policies require permission to adapt or use these materials, AHRQ will provide such permission in writing.
AHRQ or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorsement of any derivative products that may be developed from this report, such as clinical practice guidelines, other quality-enhancement tools, or reimbursement or coverage policies, may not be stated or implied.
A representative from AHRQ served as a Contracting Officer’s Representative and reviewed the contract deliverables for adherence to contract requirements and quality. AHRQ did not directly participate in the literature search, determination of study eligibility criteria, data analysis, interpretation of data, or preparation or drafting of this report.
AHRQ appreciates appropriate acknowledgment and citation of its work. Suggested language for acknowledgment: This work was based on an evidence report, Impact of Healthcare Algorithms on Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health and Healthcare, by the Evidence-based Practice Center Program at the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ).
- NLM CatalogRelated NLM Catalog Entries
- Review The Impact of Health Care Algorithms on Racial and Ethnic Disparities : A Systematic Review.[Ann Intern Med. 2024]Review The Impact of Health Care Algorithms on Racial and Ethnic Disparities : A Systematic Review.Siddique SM, Tipton K, Leas B, Jepson C, Aysola J, Cohen JB, Flores E, Harhay MO, Schmidt H, Weissman GE, et al. Ann Intern Med. 2024 Apr; 177(4):484-496. Epub 2024 Mar 12.
- Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.[Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022]Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.Crider K, Williams J, Qi YP, Gutman J, Yeung L, Mai C, Finkelstain J, Mehta S, Pons-Duran C, Menéndez C, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1; 2(2022). Epub 2022 Feb 1.
- The future of Cochrane Neonatal.[Early Hum Dev. 2020]The future of Cochrane Neonatal.Soll RF, Ovelman C, McGuire W. Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov; 150:105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
- Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.[Med J Aust. 2020]Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.Osborne SR, Alston LV, Bolton KA, Whelan J, Reeve E, Wong Shee A, Browne J, Walker T, Versace VL, Allender S, et al. Med J Aust. 2020 Dec; 213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1.
- Review Lipid Screening in Childhood for Detection of Multifactorial Dyslipidemia: A Systematic Evidence Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force[ 2016]Review Lipid Screening in Childhood for Detection of Multifactorial Dyslipidemia: A Systematic Evidence Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task ForceLozano P, Henrikson NB, Morrison CC, Dunn J, Nguyen M, Blasi P, Whitlock EP. 2016 Aug
- Impact of Healthcare Algorithms on Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health and H...Impact of Healthcare Algorithms on Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health and Healthcare
- The Role of Immunotherapy in the Treatment of AsthmaThe Role of Immunotherapy in the Treatment of Asthma
- Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Measures for Guiding Antibiotic Treatment for Ho...Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Measures for Guiding Antibiotic Treatment for Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia
- The Clinical Utility of Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide (FeNO) in Asthma Managem...The Clinical Utility of Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide (FeNO) in Asthma Management
- Interventions To Improve Cardiovascular Risk Factors in People With Serious Ment...Interventions To Improve Cardiovascular Risk Factors in People With Serious Mental Illness
Your browsing activity is empty.
Activity recording is turned off.
See more...