ArticleBMC bioinformatics2017
Interpretation of microbiota-based diagnostics by explaining individual classifier decisions.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Applications to Inflammatory Bowel Disease, with Practical Guidelines for Interpretation.Inflammatory bowel diseases · 2022Pooled it
- Probiotic treatment with specific lactobacilli does not improve an unfavorable vaginal microbiota prior to fertility treatment-A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Trial
- Overview of data preprocessing for machine learning applications in human microbiome research.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
- Unbox the black-box for the medical explainable AI via multi-modal and multi-centre data fusion: A mini-review, two showcases and beyond.An international journal on information fusion · 2022Article
- Ding's herbal enema treats dextran sulfate sodium-induced colitis in mice by regulating the gut microbiota and maintaining the Treg/Th17 cell balance.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2021Article
- Applications of Machine Learning in Human Microbiome Studies: A Review on Feature Selection, Biomarker Identification, Disease Prediction and Treatment.Frontiers in microbiology · 2021Review
- Explainable artificial intelligence models using real-world electronic health record data: a systematic scoping review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020Article
- A systematic review of the applications of artificial intelligence and machine learning in autoimmune diseases.NPJ digital medicine · 2020Review
- Reply: Non-transparent and insufficient descriptions of non-validated microbiome methods and related reproductive outcome results should be interpreted with caution.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2019Article
- The application of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) in electronic health record research: A scoping review.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe human microbiota is associated with various disease states and holds a great promise for non-invasive diagnostics. However, microbiota data is challenging for traditional diagnostic approaches: It is high-dimensional, sparse and comprises of high inter-personal variation. State of the art machine learning tools are therefore needed to achieve this goal. While these tools have the ability to learn from complex data and interpret patterns therein that cannot be identified by humans, they often operate as black boxes, offering no insight into their decision-making process. In most cases, it is difficult to represent the learning of a classifier in a comprehensible way, which makes them prone to be mistrusted, or even misused, in a clinical environment. In this study, we aim to elucidate microbiota-based classifier decisions in a biologically meaningful context to allow their interpretation.
resultsWe applied a method for explanation of classifier decisions on two microbiota datasets of increasing complexity: gut versus skin microbiota samples, and inflammatory bowel disease versus healthy gut microbiota samples. The algorithm simulates bacterial species as being unknown to a pre-trained classifier, and measures its effect on the outcome. Consequently, each patient is assigned a unique quantitative estimation of which species in their microbiota defined the classification of their sample. The algorithm was able to explain the classifier decisions well, demonstrated by our validation method, and the explanations were biologically consistent with recent microbiota findings.
conclusionsApplication of a method for explaining individual classifier decisions for complex microbiota analysis proved feasible and opens perspectives on personalized therapy. Providing an explanation to support a microbiota-based diagnosis could guide decisions of clinical microbiologists, and has the potential to increase their confidence in the outcome of such decision support systems. This may facilitate the development of new diagnostic applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.