% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@INPROCEEDINGS{Li:908663,
author = {Li, Jingwei},
title = {{C}ross-ethnicity/race generalization failure of
{RSFC}-based behavioral prediction and potential downstream
consequences},
reportid = {FZJ-2022-02752},
year = {2022},
abstract = {Algorithmic biases that favor majority populations pose a
key challenge to the application of machinelearning for
precision medicine. In neuroimaging, there is growing
interest in the prediction ofbehavioral phenotypes based on
resting-state functional connectivity (RSFC). In that
context, predictivemodels are typically built by
capitalizing on large cohorts with mixed ethnic groups, in
which theproportions of certain groups, e.g. African
Americans (AA), are limited. Here, we investigated
cross-ethnicity/race generalizability of the current,
field-standard behavioral prediction approach using
twolarge-scale public datasets from the United States.
Specifically, we observed larger prediction errors inAA than
white Americans (WA) for most behavioral measures using both
the Human ConnectomeProject (HCP) and the Adolescent Brain
Cognitive Development (ABCD) data. This prediction
biastowards WA corresponded to more WA-like brain-behavior
association patterns learned by the models.Looking into the
direction of prediction errors, concerns can be raised if
the machine-learning predictionresults would be uncritically
used, in particular for the diagnosis of mental disorders.
For example, socialsupport measures were more overpredicted
for AA than WA, whereas social distress measures such
asPerceived Rejection were more underpredicted for AA than
WA.Furthermore, African pre-adolescent participants suffered
from more overpredicted social problems,rule-breaking and
aggressive behaviors compared to white participants. Effects
of the trainingpopulations were also studied by comparing
predictive models trained specifically on AA, specifically
onWA, or on a mixture of AA and WA with equal sizes.
Although specific training on AA slightly helped toreduce
the biases against AA, most behavioral measures still
exhibited larger prediction errors in AAthan WA. Other
possible sources of the biases such as neuroimaging
preprocessing (e.g., brain templatesand functional atlases)
and the design of behavioral measures need to be examined in
the future.},
month = {Jun},
date = {2022-06-19},
organization = {Organization for Human Brain Mapping,
Glasgow, Scotland (UK), 19 Jun 2022 -
23 Jun 2022},
subtyp = {After Call},
cin = {INM-7},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)INM-7-20090406},
pnm = {5254 - Neuroscientific Data Analytics and AI (POF4-525)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5254},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)6},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/908663},
}