A Practical Upper Bound on Selection Bias Effects in Medical Prediction Models
Kara Liu, Maggie Wang, Russ B. Altman
Abstract
Selection bias is a common and often unavoidable aspect of real-world data that challenges the generalizability of machine learning models. When models trained on biased data are deployed in the broader target population, poor model generalization may lead to real harm, particularly in high-risk settings such as healthcare. This risk highlights the need for practitioners to reliably assess model generalizability prior to deployment. However, existing methods for predicting model performance rely on unrealistic access to the target distribution or knowledge of the selection mechanism causing bias. To address these limitations, we propose a novel upper bound on the worst-case model performance on the target population under the realistic setting where the selection mechanism and the target population data are only partially observed. We demonstrate the validity and practical utility of our method through experiments on fully synthetic data, semi-synthetic data derived from the All of Us Research Program, and real-world selection bias in MIMIC-IV. Our work offers a principled and practical tool to estimate the impact of selection bias in an otherwise intractable setting, thereby enabling practitioners to build safer and more generalizable models in healthcare and beyond. We release our code for public use at https://github.com/kara-liu/selection_gap_est/.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext e6c58664-6445-4344-945c-c6a407c46ae5Builds on1
Related papers
- Change is Hard: A Closer Look at Subpopulation ShiftYuzhe Yang, Haoran Zhang, Dina Katabi, Marzyeh GhassemiICML 2023 · 149 citations
- An Information-theoretic Approach to Distribution ShiftsMarco Federici, Ryota Tomioka, Patrick ForréNeurIPS 2021 · 30 citations
- Identifying Selection Bias from Observational DataDavid Kaltenpoth, Jilles VreekenAAAI 2023 · 12 citations
- Understanding challenges to the interpretation of disaggregated evaluations of algorithmic fairnessStephen Pfohl, Natalie Harris, Chirag Nagpal, David Madras et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 9 citations
- Are Your Fairness Metrics Accurate? A Semi-Supervised Approach to Improving Fairness Estimates Under Sample Selection BiasM. Clara De Paolis Kaluza, Thulasi Tholeti, Yile Chen, Ricardo Baeza-Yates et al.KDD 2025 · 1 citation
