Hybrid Federated and Split Learning for Privacy Preserving Clinical Prediction and Treatment Optimization
Organizations: Dept. of Information Technology, Washington University of Science and Technology, Alexandria, VA, USA · Cognitive Links LLC, Maryland, USA
Abstract
Collaborative clinical decision support is often constrained by governance and privacy rules that prevent pooling patient-level records across institutions. We present a hybrid privacy-preserving framework that combines Federated Learning (FL) and Split Learning (SL) to support decision-oriented healthcare modeling without raw-data sharing. The approach keeps feature-extraction trunks on clients while hosting prediction heads on a coordinating server, enabling shared representation learning and exposing an explicit collaboration boundary where privacy controls can be applied. Rather than assuming distributed training is inherently private, we audit leakage empirically using membership inference on cut-layer representations and study lightweight defenses based on activation clipping and additive Gaussian noise. We evaluate across three public clinical datasets under non-IID client partitions using a unified pipeline and assess performance jointly along four deployment-relevant axes: factual predictive utility, uplift-based ranking under capacity constraints, audited privacy leakage, and communication overhead. Results show that hybrid FL-SL variants achieve competitive predictive performance and decision-facing prioritization behavior relative to standalone FL or SL, while providing a tunable privacy-utility trade-off that can reduce audited leakage without requiring raw-data sharing. Overall, the work positions hybrid FL-SL as a practical design space for privacy-preserving healthcare decision support where utility, leakage risk, and deployment cost must be balanced explicitly.
Figures & tables
| Paradigm | Exchanged Objects | Post-2020 Examples | Decision-Support Gap |
| Federated Learning (FL) | Model updates; optional secure aggregation | Challenges [ 2 ] ; healthcare evidence [ 3 ] ; EHR review [ 8 ] | Often predictive-only; leakage auditing is inconsistent in applied pipelines [ 7 ] . |
| Split Learning (SL) | Cut-layer activations and backpropagated gradients | SL survey [ 15 ] ; representation attacks [ 13 , 14 ] | Privacy/compute focus; decision utility such as uplift prioritization is rarely evaluated. |
| Hybrid FL and SL | Split representations with federated aggregation | SplitFed [ 4 ] ; edge analysis [ 5 ] ; PPSFL [ 10 ] | Limited treatment-optimization focus; unified auditing and cross-dataset validation are often incomplete. |
| Causal / Uplift (Centralized) | Centralized with counterfactual estimators | CATE challenges [ 6 ] ; HTA review [ 16 ] ; uplift benchmarking [ 17 ] | Typically assumes pooled data; governance and multi-site constraints are not addressed. |
| This Work | Hybrid FL and SL with uplift evaluation | Proposed framework | Unified utility, communication, and membership inference auditing across datasets and client partitions. |
| Dataset | (treatment proxy) | (outcome) | Client partition ( client_id ) |
| eICU-demo [ 20 ] | Early vasopressor exposure in first 6 hours (binary) | In-hospital mortality (binary) | Admission diagnosis groups (top diagnoses vs other), inducing site-like heterogeneity |
| MEPS 2022 [ 21 ] | Statin exposure from prescribed medicine records (binary) | Inpatient utilization indicator (binary) | Region-based partition to mimic policy and access differences |
| NHANES 2015–2018 [ 22 ] | Statin mention in prescription file (binary) | Controlled cholesterol indicator (binary) | Survey cycle-based partition (cycle I vs J) for temporal shift |
| Mode | Exchange | Computation placement | Key rationale |
| Centralized | None (pooled data) | Single trainer | Upper-bound utility reference |
| FL (FedAvg) | Model weights/updates | Full model trained locally | Keeps raw data local; aggregates updates [ 2 ] |
| SL | Activations and gradients at cut layer | Trunk on client, head on server | Reduces client compute; shifts depth to server |
| Hybrid FL-SL | Split activations plus federated aggregation of client trunks | Trunk local (federated), head server (split) | Combines parallelism and partitioning [ 4 , 5 ] |
| Client trunk | 2-layer MLP: (ReLU) |
| Cut layer | After trunk output (Split/Hybrid) |
| Server heads | Two independent heads: + sigmoid |
| Training | Adam; ; batch (train), (eval); local |
| Defense | Activation clipping ; Gaussian noise |
| Dataset | Method | AUROC | AUUC | End | Trim | Worst | Comm | Rounds | MIA |
| Uplift | % | AUUC | (MB) | AUC | |||||
| eicu | Centralized | N/A | |||||||
| eicu | FedAvg | N/A | |||||||
| eicu | Split | 0.49 | |||||||
| eicu | Hybrid | 0.48 | |||||||
| eicu | Hybrid+Pers. | 0.50 |
| Configuration | AUUC across clients | AUROC across clients | |||||
| Dataset | Method | Mean | Std | Worst | Mean | Std | Worst |
| eicu | Centralized | ||||||
| eicu | FedAvg | ||||||
| eicu | Split | ||||||
| eicu | Hybrid | ||||||
| eicu | Hybrid+Pers. | ||||||