Deployment-readiness audit of calibration, clinical utility, and fairness in perioperative infection prediction

Objective: Clinical risk scores intended to guide patient-level decisions can show strong average performance. However, predicted probabilities can be systematically too high or too low in specific subgroups even when overall performance is strong. We audited deployment readiness of a strong end-of-surgery postoperative infection model across clinically relevant subgroups and tested mitigation strategies in miscalibrated subgroups. Materials and Methods: We analyzed out-of-fold predictions for 10,719 surgical procedures at a Swiss tertiary hospital, with 504 postoperative bacterial infection events. Prespecified axes were recorded sex, age stratum, and an EHR-derived physiological-reserve proxy. Within subgroups and pairwise intersections, we evaluated discrimination, calibration, threshold-specific errors, and decision-curve net benefit at the prespecified operating threshold. We compared group-specific isotonic recalibration with Wasserstein-barycenter postprocessing and demonstrated portability in SUPPORT2. Results: Overall AUROC was 0.876. While sex-marginal discrimination was similar in women and men (0.878 vs 0.875), age and reserve stratification revealed deployment-readiness failures. Calibration-in-the-large ranged from -0.86 in frail patients to -2.47 in non-frail patients. At the 0.10 operating threshold, decision-curve net benefit was positive in frail patients but negative in pre-frail and non-frail patients. Isotonic recalibration corrected average physiological-reserve-stratified calibration without worsening Brier scores, whereas Wasserstein postprocessing worsened calibration in most procedure clusters. Discussion: Discrimination-only or sex-marginal evaluation would have missed subgroup failures with clinical-utility implications. Conclusion: Subgroup fairness audits for clinical deployment should jointly evaluate discrimination, calibration, and utility. We implemented the audit as the open-source isitfair framework for identifying deployment-relevant subgroup failures, comparing mitigation strategies, and generating structured reports.