Machine Learning and Public Health: Identifying and Mitigating Algorithmic Bias through a Systematic Review
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Machine learning (ML) promises to revolutionize public health through improved surveillance, risk stratification, and resource allocation. However, without systematic attention to algorithmic bias, ML may inadvertently reinforce existing health disparities. We present a systematic literature review of algorithmic bias identification, discussion, and reporting in Dutch public health ML research from 2021 to 2025. To this end, we developed the Risk of Algorithmic Bias Assessment Tool (RABAT) by integrating elements from established frameworks (Cochrane Risk of Bias, PROBAST, Microsoft Responsible AI checklist) and applied it to 35 peer-reviewed studies. Our analysis reveals pervasive gaps: although data sampling and missing data practices are well documented, most studies omit explicit fairness framing, subgroup analyses, and transparent discussion of potential harms. In response, we introduce a four-stage fairness-oriented framework called ACAR (Awareness, Conceptualization, Application, Reporting), with guiding questions derived from our systematic literature review to help researchers address fairness across the ML lifecycle. We conclude with actionable recommendations for public health ML practitioners to consistently consider algorithmic bias and foster transparency, ensuring that algorithmic innovations advance health equity rather than undermine it.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 99 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Oct 2025.
Builds on
17 of 99 references.
References · 17
- 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
- 2018Datasheets for Datasetscited by 1,371
- 2018Model Cards for Model Reportingcited by 1,068
- 2017Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 802
- 2016Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instrumentscited by 671
- 2018Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?cited by 262
- 2019The What-If Tool: Interactive Probing of Machine Learning Modelscited by 207
- 2017Fairness in Machine Learning: Lessons from Political Philosophycited by 148
- 2018Aequitas: A Bias and Fairness Audit Toolkitcited by 145
- 2017Fairness Testing: Testing Software for Discriminationcited by 123
- 2018The Measure and Mismeasure of Fairnesscited by 94
- 2022Healthsheet: Development of a Transparency Artifact for Health Datasetscited by 23
5 more
- 2023Unmasking Bias in AI: A Systematic Review of Bias Detection and Mitigation Strategies in Electronic Health Record-based Modelscited by 9
- 2015FairTest: Discovering Unwarranted Associations in Data-Driven Applicationscited by 6
- 2024Exploring Bias and Prediction Metrics to Characterise the Fairness of Machine Learning for Equity-Centered Public Health Decision-Making: A Narrative Reviewcited by 6
- 2023Connecting Fairness in Machine Learning with Public Health Equitycited by 4
- 2025Auditing a Dutch Public Sector Risk Profiling Algorithm Using an Unsupervised Bias Detection Toolcited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.