Evidence record 19477 · automatically gathered

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

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 revi

Record details

Published: 12 August 2026
Source: arXiv cs.LG
Category: Research
Topics: Healthcare
Retrieved: 14 August 2026

source-onlyevidence status

These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.

How to cite this record

ethics.ai (12 August 2026), “Learning Under Treatment-Induced Label Indeterminacy with Expert Annotations of Counterfactual Outcomes: A Case Study in Neurological Prognostication,” evidence record 19477, https://ethics.ai/record/19477 (originally published by arXiv cs.LG).

JSON

Use and limitations

This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.