Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41351059›Full record

ArticleBioData mining2025

A fairness-aware machine learning framework for maternal health in Ghana: integrating explainability, bias mitigation, and causal inference for ethical AI deployment.

Augustus Osborne, Kobloobase Usani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioData mining, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Augustus OsborneInstitute for Development, Western Area, Freetown, Sierra Leone. augustusosborne2@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0226-841X
Kobloobase UsaniDepartment of Data Science and Artificial Intelligence, School of Business, Computing and Social Sciences, University of Gloucestershire, Cheltenham, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAntenatal care (ANC) uptake in Ghana remains inequitable, with socioeconomic and geographic disparities limiting progress toward universal maternal health coverage (SDG 3). We present a novel, fairness-aware machine learning framework for predicting antenatal care uptake among women in Ghana, integrating explainability, bias mitigation, and causal inference to support ethical artificial intelligence (AI) deployment in low- and middle-income countries.

methodsUsing the 2022 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey (n = 3,314 eligible women with a recent live birth), we applied multiple imputation by chained equations (m = 10), appropriate categorical encoding, and synthetic minority oversampling (SMOTE) within training folds. Four supervised models (logistic regression, random forest, XGBoost, support vector machine) underwent stratified 5‑fold nested cross‑validation with cost‑sensitive threshold optimization (selected probability threshold = 0.45). Explainability (SHAP), fairness auditing (AIF360; metrics: statistical parity difference, disparate impact, equal opportunity difference, average odds difference, theil index), preprocessing mitigation (reweighing), counterfactual explanations (DiCE), and cautious treatment effect estimation (causal forests within a double machine learning framework) were integrated. Performance metrics included accuracy, precision, recall, F1, ROC‑AUC, minority class PR‑AUC, balanced accuracy, calibration (Brier score), and decision curve net benefit.

resultsThe optimized random forest model achieved the highest accuracy (0.68) and recall (0.84) in identifying women with inadequate ANC contacts. Calibration was strong, with a brier score of 0.158, a calibration slope of 0.97, and an intercept of − 0.02. Fairness auditing revealed baseline disparities in model predictions across wealth, region, ethnicity, and religion, with a statistical parity difference for wealth status of 0.182 and a Disparate Impact of 1.62. Following reweighting, disparate impact improved into the fairness range (0.92; within the recommended 0.8–1.25 interval), and statistical parity difference reduced to − 0.028. Counterfactual analysis indicated that education, wealth, media exposure, and health worker contacts were the most modifiable factors for improving ANC uptake. Exploratory causal inference using double machine learning suggested that improving wealth status and education could be associated with a 16% (Average Treatment Effect [ATE] = 0.163) and 14% (ATE = 0.142) increase, respectively, in the probability of adequate ANC, with greater effects observed among urban and educated subgroups. Adjusted odds ratio (AOR) analysis showed that women in the richest quintile were nearly twice as likely to receive adequate ANC (AOR = 1.91, 95% CI: 1.44–2.53; p < 0.001), while those in the poorest quintile had significantly lower odds (AOR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.45–0.75; p < 0.001). Additional significant predictors included health insurance coverage (AOR = 1.74, 95% CI: 1.19–2.55), health worker contacts (AOR = 1.33, 95% CI: 1.11–1.58), and pregnancy intention (AOR = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.30–1.82).

conclusionThis integrated, fairness-aware machine learning framework suggest robust, equitable, and actionable prediction of ANC uptake among Ghanaian women. Key modifiable determinants include wealth, education, and healthcare access barriers. The framework offers a replicable, ethical blueprint for transparent and fair AI deployment in maternal health, supporting targeted interventions to advance universal access to quality care in Ghana. Policymakers and health managers can leverage these AI tools to identify high-risk women, monitor intervention impacts, and allocate resources more equitably, advancing progress toward universal access to quality maternal care in Ghana.

Indexed as

Antenatal careCausal forestsCounterfactualsExplainable AIFairnessGhanaHealth equityMachine learningMaternal health

Identifiers

PMID41351059
PMCPMC12781815

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.