PreprintCited by 43Privacy-Preserving Technologies in DataMachine Learning in HealthcareArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

Federated Uncertainty-Aware Learning for Distributed Hospital EHR Data

Open access
Boughorbel, Sabri, Jarray, Fethi, Venugopal, Neethu, Moosa, Shabir, Elhadi, Haithum, Makhlouf, Michel·2019·arXiv

Abstract

Recent works have shown that applying Machine Learning to Electronic Health Records (EHR) can strongly accelerate precision medicine. This requires developing models based on diverse EHR sources. Federated Learning (FL) has enabled predictive modeling using distributed training which lifted the need of sharing data and compromising privacy. Since models are distributed in FL, it is attractive to devise ensembles of Deep Neural Networks that also assess model uncertainty. We propose a new FL model called Federated Uncertainty-Aware Learning Algorithm (FUALA) that improves on Federated Averaging (FedAvg) in the context of EHR. FUALA embeds uncertainty information in two ways: It reduces the contribution of models with high uncertainty in the aggregated model. It also introduces model ensembling at prediction time by keeping the last layers of each hospital from the final round. In FUALA, the Federator (central node) sends at each round the average model to all hospitals as well as a randomly assigned hospital model update to estimate its generalization on that hospital own data. Each hospital sends back its model update as well a generalization estimation of the assigned model. At prediction time, the model outputs C predictions for each sample where C is the number of hospital models. The experimental analysis conducted on a cohort of 87K deliveries for the task of preterm-birth prediction showed that the proposed approach outperforms FedAvg when evaluated on out-of-distribution data. We illustrated how uncertainty could be measured using the proposed approach.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1910.12191

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Federated learning supports predictive modeling from diverse sources and can give clinicians more insight into earlier treatment risks and benefits.

    “Federated learning has also enabled predictive modeling based on diverse sources, which can provide clinicians with additional insights into the risks and benefits of treating patients earlier [9, 10, 90].”

    From Federated Learning for Healthcare Informatics (2021) · cites this paper as [9]

    The Introduction (p. 1) says federated learning enables predictive models trained jointly from different EHR sources. The Clinical Application section (p. 2) describes predicting preterm-birth risk three months before delivery, but does not say the model gives clinicians insight into the risks and benefits of treating patients earlier. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Federated learning can connect EHR data across medical institutions, letting them share experiences rather than data while preserving privacy.

    “Federated learning is a viable method to connect EHR data from medical institutions, allowing them to share their experiences, and not their data, with a guarantee of privacy [9, 25, 34, 45, 65, 82].”

    From Federated Learning for Healthcare Informatics (2021) · cites this paper as [9]

    The Introduction (p. 1) says federated learning jointly trains models from different EHR sources without sharing data, and §3.2 (p. 3) says the proposed algorithm preserves data privacy by sending model updates to the data location. Those passages support the paraphrase, but not the citing sentence’s stronger claim of a privacy guarantee; the Introduction also identifies privacy as an ongoing challenge. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. [1][1] Qiang Yang, Yang Liu, Tianjian Chen, and Yongxin Tong. Federated machine learning: Concept and applications. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST) , 10(2):12, 2019. -
  2. [3][3] Xiang Li, Kaixuan Huang, Wenhao Yang, Shusen Wang, and Zhihua Zhang. On the convergence of fedavg on non-iid data. arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.02189 , 2019. - · arXiv
  3. [7][7] Yang Liu, Tianjian Chen, and Qiang Yang. Secure federated transfer learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1812.03337 , 2018. - · arXiv
  4. [11][11] Balaji Lakshminarayanan, Alexander Pritzel, and Charles Blundell. Simple and scalable predictive uncertainty estimation using deep ensembles. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , pages 6402-6413, 2017. -
  5. [12][12] Michael W Dusenberry, Dustin Tran, Edward Choi, Jonas Kemp, Jeremy Nixon, Ghassen Jerfel, Katherine Heller, and Andrew M Dai. Analyzing the role of model uncertainty for electronic health records. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.03842 , 2019. - · arXiv
  6. [13][13] Edward Choi, Mohammad Taha Bahadori, Jimeng Sun, Joshua Kulas, Andy Schuetz, and Walter Stewart. Retain: An interpretable predictive model for healthcare using reverse time attention mechanism. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , pages 3504-3512, 2016. -
  7. [15][15] Michael S Kramer, Xun Zhang, and Robert W Platt. Analyzing risks of adverse pregnancy outcomes. American journal of epidemiology , 179(3):361-367, 2013. -
  8. [16][16] Fernando C Barros, Aris T Papageorghiou, Cesar G Victora, Julia A Noble, Ruyan Pang, Jay Iams, Leila Cheikh Ismail, Robert L Goldenberg, Ann Lambert, Michael S Kramer, et al. The distribution of clinical phenotypes of preterm birth syndrome: implications for prevention. JAMA pediatrics , 169(3):220-229, 2015. -
  9. [18][18] Truyen Tran, Wei Luo, Dinh Phung, Jonathan Morris, Kristen Rickard, and Svetha Venkatesh. Preterm birth prediction: Deriving stable and interpretable rules from high dimensional data. In Conference on machine learning in healthcare, LA, USA , 2016. -
  10. [19][19] Ilia V ovsha, Ansaf Salleb-Aouissi, Anita Raja, Thomas Koch, Alex Rybchuk, Axinia Radeva, Ashwath Rajan, Yiwen Huang, Hatim Diab, Ashish Tomar, et al. Using kernel methods and model selection for prediction of preterm birth. arXiv preprint arXiv:1607.07959 , 2016. - · arXiv
  11. [20][20] Sabri Boughorbel, Fethi Jarray, Neethu Venugopal, and Haithum Elhadi. Alternating loss correction for preterm-birth prediction from ehr data with noisy labels. Machine Learning for Health (ML4H) Workshop in NeurIPS 2018 , 2018. -
  12. [21][21] Edward Choi, Mohammad Taha Bahadori, Andy Schuetz, Walter F Stewart, and Jimeng Sun. Doctor ai: Predicting clinical events via recurrent neural networks. In Machine Learning for Healthcare Conference , pages 301-318, 2016.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Boughorbel, S., Jarray, F., Venugopal, N., Moosa, S., Elhadi, H., & Makhlouf, M.
Affiliations
Sidra Medical and Research Center (QA)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2019
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2981389249
Cited by
43
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
federated learning, uncertainty estimation, electronic health records, model ensembling, FedAvg, preterm birth prediction, out-of-distribution generalization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review