arXiv — Machine Learning · · 4 min read

Learning Under Treatment-Induced Label Indeterminacy with Expert Annotations of Counterfactual Outcomes: A Case Study in Neurological Prognostication

Mirrored from arXiv — Machine Learning for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.

Computer Science > Machine Learning

arXiv:2608.12477 (cs)
[Submitted on 12 Aug 2026]

Title:Learning Under Treatment-Induced Label Indeterminacy with Expert Annotations of Counterfactual Outcomes: A Case Study in Neurological Prognostication

View a PDF of the paper titled Learning Under Treatment-Induced Label Indeterminacy with Expert Annotations of Counterfactual Outcomes: A Case Study in Neurological Prognostication, by Xiaobin Shen and 3 other authors
View PDF HTML (experimental)
Abstract:Clinical prediction models are often developed as if the outcome of interest were cleanly observed for every patient. This assumption fails when treatment decisions make the clinically relevant outcome permanently unobservable. As a case study of this problem, we consider post-cardiac-arrest neurological prognostication using a cohort of 2,497 patients, including 1,429 patients whose outcomes were rendered indeterminate by treatment decisions. These patients with indeterminate outcomes were reviewed by independent clinical experts, who provided their guesses of counterfactual outcomes about what would have happened to the patients. We refer to these patients as uncertain cases. We also have patients for whom we observe their clinically relevant outcomes; we refer to these patients as certain cases. We propose a framework for evaluating prediction models that explicitly splits the evaluation between certain and uncertain cases. Here, we cannot easily evaluate both types of cases in a uniform manner as the available target labels differ. We then propose a simple prediction model that uses target labels from both certain and uncertain cases in a manner that allows us to trade off between them. Across the proposed neural model and a collection of tabular baselines, models with similar certain-case AUROC can nevertheless differ substantially in both certain-case Brier score and their probability estimates for uncertain cases. Improving alignment with target labels of uncertain cases for our proposed model generally comes at the cost of worse accuracy on certain cases, highlighting an explicit tradeoff that standard evaluation conceals. These results show that when treatment decisions determine whether clinically meaningful outcomes remain observable, conventional evaluation metrics can miss important failure modes in the very patients for whom prognostic support matters most.
Comments: Machine Learning for Healthcare (MLHC) 2026
Subjects: Machine Learning (cs.LG)
Cite as: arXiv:2608.12477 [cs.LG]
  (or arXiv:2608.12477v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.12477
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Xiaobin Shen [view email]
[v1] Wed, 12 Aug 2026 18:01:13 UTC (1,525 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

    View a PDF of the paper titled Learning Under Treatment-Induced Label Indeterminacy with Expert Annotations of Counterfactual Outcomes: A Case Study in Neurological Prognostication, by Xiaobin Shen and 3 other authors
  • View PDF
  • HTML (experimental)
  • TeX Source

Current browse context:

cs.LG
< prev   |   next >
Change to browse by:
cs

References & Citations

Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

loading...
Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy Reddit
Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
Links to Code Toggle
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub Toggle
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
GotitPub Toggle
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Huggingface Toggle
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
ScienceCast Toggle
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle
Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Spaces Toggle
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
Spaces Toggle
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)
Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Core recommender toggle
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
IArxiv recommender toggle
IArxiv Recommender (What is IArxiv?)
About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.

Sign in →

No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.

More from arXiv — Machine Learning