Model-based Detection of Spatial Disease Boundaries Using Amortized Bayesian Inference
Wu, K. L.; Banerjee, S.
Show abstract
Disease boundary analysis identifies abrupt changes in health outcomes across geographic boundaries, guiding targeted public health interventions and outbreak surveillance. Current implementations often adopt a Bayesian "wombling" approach and largely rely on Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) posterior sampling, presenting scalability issues for large-scale disease surveillance. We leverage amortized Bayesian inference (ABI) to accelerate the detection of spatial health disparities between neighboring US counties by embedding neural posterior estimation within a Bayesian areal wombling framework. Exploiting the computational efficiency of ABI, we further introduce the Residual Disparity Elimination Target, a metric for the required reduction in mortality or prevalence for a region to eliminate a significant disparity with its neighbor. We analyze tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer mortality rates across mainland US counties and achieve results concordant with MCMC analysis while scaling areal wombling to hundreds of outcomes and translating disparity detection into interpretable policy objectives.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- An Interpretable Bayesian Clustering Approach with Feature Selection for Analyzing Spatially Resolved Transcriptomics Data 94%
- A Bayesian Approach to Restricted Latent Class Models for Scientifically-Structured Clustering of Multivariate Binary Outcomes 94%
- Bayesian inference for copy number intra-tumoral heterogeneity from single-cell RNA-sequencing data 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Probabilistic Cause-of-disease Assignment using Case-control Diagnostic Tests: A Latent Variable Regression Approach 95%
- A robust and fast two-sample test of equal correlations with an application to differential co-expression 92%
- Bias reduction and inference for electronic health record data under selection and phenotype misclassification: three case studies 92%
"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.