ArticleScientific reports2022
Training calibration-based counterfactual explainers for deep learning models in medical image analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating Anatomical Priors Into a Causal Diffusion Model.IEEE transactions on medical imaging · 2026Article
- Clinically Explainable Disease Diagnosis Based on Biomarker Activation Map.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2026Article
- An Interpretable Chest X-ray Classification Framework Using Prototype Memory and Counterfactual Consistency.Cureus · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence standardizes CT-based body composition analysis in breast cacer to address methodological heterogeneity.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Reinforcement Learning to Prevent Acute Care Events Among Medicaid Populations: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR AI · 2025Article
- Detecting and Mitigating the Clever Hans Effect in Medical Imaging: A Scoping Review.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2025Article
- A literature review of artificial intelligence (AI) for medical image segmentation: from AI and explainable AI to trustworthy AI.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Review
- Visual interpretability of image-based classification models by generative latent space disentanglement applied to in vitro fertilization.Nature communications · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid adoption of artificial intelligence methods in healthcare is coupled with the critical need for techniques to rigorously introspect models and thereby ensure that they behave reliably. This has led to the design of explainable AI techniques that uncover the relationships between discernible data signatures and model predictions. In this context, counterfactual explanations that synthesize small, interpretable changes to a given query while producing desired changes in model predictions have become popular. This under-constrained, inverse problem is vulnerable to introducing irrelevant feature manipulations, particularly when the model's predictions are not well-calibrated. Hence, in this paper, we propose the TraCE (training calibration-based explainers) technique, which utilizes a novel uncertainty-based interval calibration strategy for reliably synthesizing counterfactuals. Given the wide-spread adoption of machine-learned solutions in radiology, our study focuses on deep models used for identifying anomalies in chest X-ray images. Using rigorous empirical studies, we demonstrate the superiority of TraCE explanations over several state-of-the-art baseline approaches, in terms of several widely adopted evaluation metrics. Our findings show that TraCE can be used to obtain a holistic understanding of deep models by enabling progressive exploration of decision boundaries, to detect shortcuts, and to infer relationships between patient attributes and disease severity.
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.