Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35551007›Full record

ArticleComputers in biology and medicine2022

The effect of machine learning explanations on user trust for automated diagnosis of COVID-19.

Kanika Goel, Renuka Sindhgatta, Sumit Kalra, Rohan Goel, Preeti Mutreja

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
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.

Kanika GoelSchool of Information Systems, Queensland University of Technology, Australia. Electronic address: k.goel@qut.edu.au.
Renuka SindhgattaIBM Research AI, Bangalore, India. Electronic address: renuka.sr@ibm.com.
Sumit KalraDepartment of Computer Science, Indian Institute of Technology, Jodhpur, India. Electronic address: sumitk@iitj.ac.in.
Rohan GoelCOVID-19 Centre at Guru Teg Bahadur (GTB) Hospital, Delhi, India. Electronic address: rohanpgoel@gmail.com.
Preeti MutrejaAll India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Jodhpur, India. Electronic address: dr.preeti.mutreja@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

COVID-19AlgorithmsHumansMachine LearningNeural Networks, ComputerTrustApplication-oriented evaluationMachine learning explanationsMedical diagnosisUser trust

Identifiers

PMID35551007
PMCPMC9080676

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.