Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Differences in predicted rates of vaginal births after cesarean across racial groups in a ‘race-neutral’ model

Anjali Suresh, Katie O’nell
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.10.14.23296978
Anjali Suresh
1Weddington High School, Ethics+Social Sciences project and course developer at Inspirit AI
Roles: Student
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: anjali.suresh2005{at}gmail.com
Katie O’nell
2Dartmouth, Brain and Cognitive Sciences BS from MIT, Ethics+Social Sciences project and course developer at Inspirit AI
PhD Student
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

When physicians and pregnant patients make decisions about whether to pursue a vaginal birth or cesarean, there are many factors at play. While vaginal birth can have health benefits for both parent and child, there are significant safety risks. In order to minimize these risks, physicians use predictive models to determine how likely patients are to have successful vaginal births after cesareans (VBAC). For many years, these predictive models included race as a variable. This decision recently came under fire, and the Maternal Fetal Medicine Unit (MFMU) published a calculator that did not include race as a variable but still predicted VBAC success with high accuracy. A large body of work in machine learning has highlighted that supposedly de-biased systems often re-code sensitive variables like race in terms of proxy variables. In order to determine if this was the case in this calculator, we replicated their formula, then found base-rate statistics of all the input variables for three different racial groups: Black, White, and Asian. We found that the distribution of VBAC probabilities for our simulated patients from these three groups was indeed significantly different from each other. Further, the predicted VBAC rates increased as a function of societal marginalization: Black patients were 47.6% likely to have a successful VBAC, Asian patients had a 48.6% probability, and White patients had a 49.4% probability. While these values are all within a few percentage points of each other, the differences in these simulated distributions show how there may still be underlying disparities in the maternal healthcare system.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This study was funded by one of the authors

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The study used ONLY openly available human data that were originally located at: 1. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-kits/2020/population-estimates-detailed.html 2. https://www.nber.org/research/data/vital-statistics-natality-birth-data 3. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4618667/ 4. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40615-020-00842-3/tables/2 5. https://elischolar.library.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3401&context=ymtdl 6. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/256448154_Racial_and_ethnic_differences_in_primary_unscheduled_cesarean_deliveries_among_low-risk_primiparous_women_at_an_academic_medical_center_A_retrospective_cohort_study 7. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db289.htm

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

Data Availability

All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-kits/2020/population-estimates-detailed.html

https://www.nber.org/research/data/vital-statistics-natality-birth-data

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4618667/

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40615-020-00842-3/tables/2

https://elischolar.library.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3401&context=ymtdl

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/256448154_Racial_and_ethnic_differences_in_primary_unscheduled_cesarean_deliveries_among_low-risk_primiparous_women_at_an_academic_medical_center_A_retrospective_cohort_study

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db289.htm

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted October 15, 2023.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Differences in predicted rates of vaginal births after cesarean across racial groups in a ‘race-neutral’ model
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Differences in predicted rates of vaginal births after cesarean across racial groups in a ‘race-neutral’ model
Anjali Suresh, Katie O’nell
medRxiv 2023.10.14.23296978; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.10.14.23296978
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Differences in predicted rates of vaginal births after cesarean across racial groups in a ‘race-neutral’ model
Anjali Suresh, Katie O’nell
medRxiv 2023.10.14.23296978; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.10.14.23296978

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Medical Ethics
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (349)
  • Allergy and Immunology (668)
  • Allergy and Immunology (668)
  • Anesthesia (181)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (2648)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (316)
  • Dermatology (223)
  • Emergency Medicine (399)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (942)
  • Epidemiology (12228)
  • Forensic Medicine (10)
  • Gastroenterology (759)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (4103)
  • Geriatric Medicine (387)
  • Health Economics (680)
  • Health Informatics (2657)
  • Health Policy (1005)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (985)
  • Hematology (363)
  • HIV/AIDS (851)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (13695)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (797)
  • Medical Education (399)
  • Medical Ethics (109)
  • Nephrology (436)
  • Neurology (3882)
  • Nursing (209)
  • Nutrition (577)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (739)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (695)
  • Oncology (2030)
  • Ophthalmology (585)
  • Orthopedics (240)
  • Otolaryngology (306)
  • Pain Medicine (250)
  • Palliative Medicine (75)
  • Pathology (473)
  • Pediatrics (1115)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (466)
  • Primary Care Research (452)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (3432)
  • Public and Global Health (6527)
  • Radiology and Imaging (1403)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (814)
  • Respiratory Medicine (871)
  • Rheumatology (409)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (410)
  • Sports Medicine (342)
  • Surgery (448)
  • Toxicology (53)
  • Transplantation (185)
  • Urology (165)