# Understanding Fairness in Recommender Systems: A Healthcare Perspective

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.03893 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.03893/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 3 of its 17 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 5 Sep 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [A Survey on the Fairness of Recommender Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.03761/) (2022)
- [Mathematical Notions vs. Human Perception of Fairness: A Descriptive Approach to Fairness for Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.04783/) (2019)
- [How Do Fairness Definitions Fare? Examining Public Attitudes Towards Algorithmic Definitions of Fairness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.03654/) (2018)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Fairness in AI-driven decision-making systems has become a critical concern, especially when these systems directly affect human lives. This paper explores the public's comprehension of fairness in healthcare recommendations. We conducted a survey where participants selected from four fairness metrics -- Demographic Parity, Equal Accuracy, Equalized Odds, and Positive Predictive Value -- across different healthcare scenarios to assess their understanding of these concepts. Our findings reveal that fairness is a complex and often misunderstood concept, with a generally low level of public understanding regarding fairness metrics in recommender systems. This study highlights the need for enhanced information and education on algorithmic fairness to support informed decision-making in using these systems. Furthermore, the results suggest that a one-size-fits-all approach to fairness may be insufficient, pointing to the importance of context-sensitive designs in developing equitable AI systems.