The Average Patient Fallacy
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Machine learning in medicine is typically optimized for population averages. This frequency weighted training privileges common presentations and marginalizes rare yet clinically critical cases, a bias we call the average patient fallacy. In mixture models, gradients from rare cases are suppressed by prevalence, creating a direct conflict with precision medicine. Clinical vignettes in oncology, cardiology, and ophthalmology show how this yields missed rare responders, delayed recognition of atypical emergencies, and underperformance on vision-threatening variants. We propose operational fixes: Rare Case Performance Gap, Rare Case Calibration Error, a prevalence utility definition of rarity, and clinically weighted objectives that surface ethical priorities. Weight selection should follow structured deliberation. AI in medicine must detect exceptional cases because of their significance.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Sep 2025.
Builds on
4 of 26 references.
References · 4
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,007
- 2019Distributionally Robust Neural Networks for Group Shifts: On the Importance of Regularization for Worst-Case Generalizationcited by 1,247
- 2018Learning Models with Uniform Performance via Distributionally Robust Optimizationcited by 335
- 2019Principles alone cannot guarantee ethical AIcited by 135
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.