Governing Decisions of Probability Cutoffs in Clinical AI Deployment: A Case Study of Asthma Exacerbation Prediction
Zheng, L.; Agnikula Kshatriya, B. S.; Ohde, J.; Rost, L.; Malik, M.; Peterson, K.; Brereton, T.; Loufek, B.; Pereira, T.; Gai, C.; Park, M.; Hartz, M.; Fladager-Muth, J.; Wi, C.-I.; Tao, C. J.; Garovic, V.; Juhn, Y. J.; Overgaard, S. M.
Show abstract
Models that estimate the probability of an adverse clinical outcome require an operational cutoff to translate continuous estimated probabilities into discrete labels that can trigger clinical action. Although statistical methods identify optimal cut-offs, threshold selection ultimately reflects value judgments regarding harm tolerance, resource allocation, and workflow feasibility. We describe a governance-informed approach to selecting a deployment threshold for an asthma exacerbation (AE) prediction model integrated into clinical workflows. Using prevalence-adjusted performance metrics and real-world provider capacity modeling, we evaluated multiple candidate thresholds and quantified downstream workload and missed-event trade-offs. We demonstrate that statistically optimal thresholds may produce operationally infeasible alert volumes or unacceptable miss rates. We propose a structured threshold governance framework integrating statistical performance, clinical utility, stakeholder input, and human oversight safeguards. This case illustrates how threshold decisions should be treated as organizational governance processes rather than purely technical optimizations.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.