Federated Learning in Healthcare: A Benchmark Comparison of Engineering and Statistical Approaches for Structured Data Analysis.

Health data science Pub Date : 2024-12-04 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.34133/hds.0196
Siqi Li, Di Miao, Qiming Wu, Chuan Hong, Danny D'Agostino, Xin Li, Yilin Ning, Yuqing Shang, Ziwen Wang, Molei Liu, Huazhu Fu, Marcus Eng Hock Ong, Hamed Haddadi, Nan Liu
{"title":"Federated Learning in Healthcare: A Benchmark Comparison of Engineering and Statistical Approaches for Structured Data Analysis.","authors":"Siqi Li, Di Miao, Qiming Wu, Chuan Hong, Danny D'Agostino, Xin Li, Yilin Ning, Yuqing Shang, Ziwen Wang, Molei Liu, Huazhu Fu, Marcus Eng Hock Ong, Hamed Haddadi, Nan Liu","doi":"10.34133/hds.0196","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Federated learning (FL) holds promise for safeguarding data privacy in healthcare collaborations. While the term \"FL\" was originally coined by the engineering community, the statistical field has also developed privacy-preserving algorithms, though these are less recognized. Our goal was to bridge this gap with the first comprehensive comparison of FL frameworks from both domains. <b>Methods:</b> We assessed 7 FL frameworks, encompassing both engineering-based and statistical FL algorithms, and compared them against local and centralized modeling of logistic regression and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (Lasso). Our evaluation utilized both simulated data and real-world emergency department data, focusing on comparing both estimated model coefficients and the performance of model predictions. <b>Results:</b> The findings reveal that statistical FL algorithms produce much less biased estimates of model coefficients. Conversely, engineering-based methods can yield models with slightly better prediction performance, occasionally outperforming both centralized and statistical FL models. <b>Conclusion:</b> This study underscores the relative strengths and weaknesses of both types of methods, providing recommendations for their selection based on distinct study characteristics. Furthermore, we emphasize the critical need to raise awareness of and integrate these methods into future applications of FL within the healthcare domain.</p>","PeriodicalId":73207,"journal":{"name":"Health data science","volume":"4 ","pages":"0196"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11615161/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health data science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34133/hds.0196","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Federated learning (FL) holds promise for safeguarding data privacy in healthcare collaborations. While the term "FL" was originally coined by the engineering community, the statistical field has also developed privacy-preserving algorithms, though these are less recognized. Our goal was to bridge this gap with the first comprehensive comparison of FL frameworks from both domains. Methods: We assessed 7 FL frameworks, encompassing both engineering-based and statistical FL algorithms, and compared them against local and centralized modeling of logistic regression and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (Lasso). Our evaluation utilized both simulated data and real-world emergency department data, focusing on comparing both estimated model coefficients and the performance of model predictions. Results: The findings reveal that statistical FL algorithms produce much less biased estimates of model coefficients. Conversely, engineering-based methods can yield models with slightly better prediction performance, occasionally outperforming both centralized and statistical FL models. Conclusion: This study underscores the relative strengths and weaknesses of both types of methods, providing recommendations for their selection based on distinct study characteristics. Furthermore, we emphasize the critical need to raise awareness of and integrate these methods into future applications of FL within the healthcare domain.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Multi-Modal CLIP-Informed Protein Editing. The Burden of Type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Young Adults in China: A Secondary Analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. Federated Learning in Healthcare: A Benchmark Comparison of Engineering and Statistical Approaches for Structured Data Analysis. Robust Meta-Model for Predicting the Likelihood of Receiving Blood Transfusion in Non-traumatic Intensive Care Unit Patients. Survival Disparities among Cancer Patients Based on Mobility Patterns: A Population-Based Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1