ArticleComputers in biology and medicine2022
The effect of machine learning explanations on user trust for automated diagnosis of COVID-19.
Article in Computers in biology and medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Demystifying Artificial Intelligence: A Systematic Review of Explainable Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- How Best to Explain Machine Learning Models to Clinicians: A User Study of Explanation Types.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Factors influencing the effectiveness of artificial intelligence-assisted decision-making in medicine: a scoping review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Article
- Factors Influencing the Effectiveness of AI-Assisted Decision-Making in Medicine: A Scoping Review.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Exploring trust factors in AI-healthcare integration: a rapid review.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Review
- Efficient management of pulmonary embolism diagnosis using a two-step interconnected machine learning model based on electronic health records data.Health information science and systems · 2024Article
- Unveiling the black box: A systematic review of Explainable Artificial Intelligence in medical image analysis.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Review
- Quality of interaction between clinicians and artificial intelligence systems. A systematic review.Future healthcare journal · 2024Review
- Machine learning and deep learning-based approach in smart healthcare: Recent advances, applications, challenges and opportunities.AIMS public health · 2024Article
- Advanced slime mould algorithm incorporating differential evolution and Powell mechanism for engineering design.iScience · 2023Article
- Comparing machine learning algorithms to predict COVID‑19 mortality using a dataset including chest computed tomography severity score data.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- An enhanced decision-making framework for predicting future trends of sharing economy.PloS one · 2023Article
- Development and validation of a machine learning model for differential diagnosis of malignant pleural effusion using routine laboratory data.Therapeutic advances in respiratory diseaseObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent years have seen deep neural networks (DNN) gain widespread acceptance for a range of computer vision tasks that include medical imaging. Motivated by their performance, multiple studies have focused on designing deep convolutional neural network architectures tailored to detect COVID-19 cases from chest computerized tomography (CT) images. However, a fundamental challenge of DNN models is their inability to explain the reasoning for a diagnosis. Explainability is essential for medical diagnosis, where understanding the reason for a decision is as important as the decision itself. A variety of algorithms have been proposed that generate explanations and strive to enhance users' trust in DNN models. Yet, the influence of the generated machine learning explanations on clinicians' trust for complex decision tasks in healthcare has not been understood. This study evaluates the quality of explanations generated for a deep learning model that detects COVID-19 based on CT images and examines the influence of the quality of these explanations on clinicians' trust. First, we collect radiologist-annotated explanations of the CT images for the diagnosis of COVID-19 to create the ground truth. We then compare ground truth explanations with machine learning explanations. Our evaluation shows that the explanations produced. by different algorithms were often correct (high precision) when compared to the radiologist annotated ground truth but a significant number of explanations were missed (significantly lower recall). We further conduct a controlled experiment to study the influence of machine learning explanations on clinicians' trust for the diagnosis of COVID-19. Our findings show that while the clinicians' trust in automated diagnosis increases with the explanations, their reliance on the diagnosis reduces as clinicians are less likely to rely on algorithms that are not close to human judgement. Clinicians want higher recall of the explanations for a better understanding of an automated diagnosis system.
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.