Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35523917›Full record

ArticleNeurocritical care2022

Demystifying the Black Box: The Importance of Interpretability of Predictive Models in Neurocritical Care.

Laura Moss, David Corsar, Martin Shaw, Ian Piper, Christopher Hawthorne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurocritical care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. An Introduction to AI for Clinicians: Tutorial.Interactive journal of medical research · 2026
    Article
  6. Letter to the Editor concerning "Development of machine learning models for predicting patient-perceived benefit following lumbar disc herniation or spinal stenosis surgery" by Z.A. Toh, et al. (Eur Spine J [2025]; doi:10.1007/s00586-025-09304-y).European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Accelerated and Interpretable Oblique Random Survival Forests.Journal of computational and graphical statistics : a joint publication of American Statistical Association, Institute of Mathematical Statistics, Interface Foundation of North America · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors.

Laura MossDepartment of Clinical Physics & Bioengineering, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Room 2.41, Level 2, New Lister Building, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, 10-16 Alexandra Parade, Glasgow, G31 2ER, UK. Laura.Moss@glasgow.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4968-0900
David CorsarSchool of Computing, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, UK.
Martin ShawDepartment of Clinical Physics & Bioengineering, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Room 2.41, Level 2, New Lister Building, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, 10-16 Alexandra Parade, Glasgow, G31 2ER, UK.
Ian PiperUsher Institute of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Christopher HawthorneDepartment of Neuroanaesthesia, Institute of Neurological Sciences, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neurocritical care patients are a complex patient population, and to aid clinical decision-making, many models and scoring systems have previously been developed. More recently, techniques from the field of machine learning have been applied to neurocritical care patient data to develop models with high levels of predictive accuracy. However, although these recent models appear clinically promising, their interpretability has often not been considered and they tend to be black box models, making it extremely difficult to understand how the model came to its conclusion. Interpretable machine learning methods have the potential to provide the means to overcome some of these issues but are largely unexplored within the neurocritical care domain. This article examines existing models used in neurocritical care from the perspective of interpretability. Further, the use of interpretable machine learning will be explored, in particular the potential benefits and drawbacks that the techniques may have when applied to neurocritical care data. Finding a solution to the lack of model explanation, transparency, and accountability is important because these issues have the potential to contribute to model trust and clinical acceptance, and, increasingly, regulation is stipulating a right to explanation for decisions made by models and algorithms. To ensure that the prospective gains from sophisticated predictive models to neurocritical care provision can be realized, it is imperative that interpretability of these models is fully considered.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsMachine LearningClinical Decision-MakingHumansProspective StudiesAlgorithmsArtificial intelligenceClinical decision-makingCritical careMachine learning

Identifiers

PMID35523917
PMCPMC9343258

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.