Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31804003›Full record

ArticleHuman brain mapping2020

Your evidence? Machine learning algorithms for medical diagnosis and prediction.

Bert Heinrichs, Simon B Eickhoff

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human brain mapping, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Ethical and Regulatory Perception of Artificial Intelligence Among Dental Students: A Cross-Sectional Study.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Bert HeinrichsInstitute of Neurosciences and Medicine, Ethics in the Neurosciences (INM-8), Research Center Jülich, Jülich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0181-0078
Simon B EickhoffInstitute of Systems Neuroscience, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Computer systems for medical diagnosis based on machine learning are not mere science fiction. Despite undisputed potential benefits, such systems may also raise problems. Two (interconnected) issues are particularly significant from an ethical point of view: The first issue is that epistemic opacity is at odds with a common desire for understanding and potentially undermines information rights. The second (related) issue concerns the assignment of responsibility in cases of failure. The core of the two issues seems to be that understanding and responsibility are concepts that are intrinsically tied to the discursive practice of giving and asking for reasons. The challenge is to find ways to make the outcomes of machine learning algorithms compatible with our discursive practice. This comes down to the claim that we should try to integrate discursive elements into machine learning algorithms. Under the title of "explainable AI" initiatives heading in this direction are already under way. Extensive research in this field is needed for finding adequate solutions.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceConfidentialityDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedEvidence-Based MedicineHumansMachine LearningMagnetic Resonance Imagingdiscursive practiceepistemic opacityexplainabilitymachine learningmedical diagnosismedical ethicsmedical predictionresponsibilityunderstanding

Identifiers

PMID31804003
PMCPMC7268052

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.