Distributed Counterfactual Modeling Approach for Investigating Hospital-Associated Racial Disparities in COVID-19 Mortality
Edmondson, M. J.; Luo, C.; Islam, N.; Asch, D.; Bian, J. J.; Chen, Y.
Show abstract
Several studies have found that black patients are more likely than white patients to test positive for or be hospitalized with COVID-19, but many of these same studies have found no difference in in-hospital mortality. These studies may have underestimated racial differences due to reliance on data from a single hospital system, as adequate control of patient-level characteristics requires aggregation of highly granular data from several institutions. Further, one factor thought to contribute to disparities in health outcomes by race is site of care. Several differences between black and white patient populations, such as access to care and referral patterns among clinicians, can lead to patients of different races largely attending different hospitals. We sought to develop a method that could study the potential association between attending hospital and racial disparity in mortality for COVID-19 patients without requiring patient-level data sharing among collaborating institutions. We propose a novel application of a distributed algorithm for generalized linear mixed modeling (GLMM) to perform counterfactual modeling and investigate the role of hospital in differences in COVID-19 mortality by race. Our counterfactual modeling approach uses simulation to randomly assign black patients to hospitals in the same distribution as those attended by white patients, quantifying the difference between observed mortality rates and simulated mortality risk following random hospital assignment. To illustrate our method, we perform a proof-of-concept analysis using data from four hospitals within the OneFlorida Clinical Research Consortium. Our approach can be used by investigators from several institutions to study the impact of admitting hospital on COVID-19 mortality, a critical step in addressing systemic racism in modern healthcare.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- A Bayesian Susceptible-Infectious-Hospitalized-Ventilated-Recovered Model to Predict Demand for COVID-19 Inpatient Care in a Large Healthcare System 94%
- Time-to-event estimation of birth year prevalence trends: a method to enable investigating the etiology of childhood disorders including autism 94%
- Modeling post-holiday surge in COVID-19 cases in Pennsylvania counties 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Implicit bias in Critical Care Data: Factors affecting sampling frequencies and missingness patterns of clinical and biological variables in ICU Patients 93%
- Development and Validation of ‘Patient Optimizer’ (POP) Algorithms for Predicting Surgical Risk with Machine Learning 92%
- Causal Analysis for Multivariate Integrated Clinical and Environmental Exposures Data 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Optimizing the Implementation of Clinical Predictive Models to Minimize National Costs: A Sepsis Case Study 94%
- Are we there yet? An adaptive SIR model for continuous estimation of COVID-19 infection rate and reproduction number in the United States 91%
- Optimal policy determination in sequential systemic and locoregional therapy of oropharyngeal squamous carcinomas: A patient-physician digital twin dyad with deep Q-learning for treatment selection 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.