Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35607616›Full record

ReviewPatterns (New York, N.Y.)2022

Human-centered explainability for life sciences, healthcare, and medical informatics.

Sanjoy Dey, Prithwish Chakraborty, Bum Chul Kwon, Amit Dhurandhar, Mohamed Ghalwash, Fernando J Suarez Saiz, Kenney Ng, Daby Sow, Kush R Varshney, Pablo Meyer

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Patterns (New York, N.Y.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

10 authors.

Sanjoy DeyCenter for Computational Health, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598, USA.
Prithwish ChakrabortyCenter for Computational Health, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598, USA.
Bum Chul KwonCenter for Computational Health, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598, USA.
Amit DhurandharIBM Research AI, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598, USA.
Mohamed GhalwashCenter for Computational Health, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598, USA.
Fernando J Suarez SaizIBM Watson Health, New York, NY 10017, USA.
Kenney NgCenter for Computational Health, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598, USA.
Daby SowIBM Research Security and Compliance, AI Industries, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598, USA.
Kush R VarshneyIBM Research AI, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598, USA.
Pablo MeyerCenter for Computational Health, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rapid advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and availability of biological, medical, and healthcare data have enabled the development of a wide variety of models. Significant success has been achieved in a wide range of fields, such as genomics, protein folding, disease diagnosis, imaging, and clinical tasks. Although widely used, the inherent opacity of deep AI models has brought criticism from the research field and little adoption in clinical practice. Concurrently, there has been a significant amount of research focused on making such methods more interpretable, reviewed here, but inherent critiques of such explainability in AI (XAI), its requirements, and concerns with fairness/robustness have hampered their real-world adoption. We here discuss how user-driven XAI can be made more useful for different healthcare stakeholders through the definition of three key personas-data scientists, clinical researchers, and clinicians-and present an overview of how different XAI approaches can address their needs. For illustration, we also walk through several research and clinical examples that take advantage of XAI open-source tools, including those that help enhance the explanation of the results through visualization. This perspective thus aims to provide a guidance tool for developing explainability solutions for healthcare by empowering both subject matter experts, providing them with a survey of available tools, and explainability developers, by providing examples of how such methods can influence in practice adoption of solutions.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceclinical researchexplainabilityhealthcarelife sciencesmachine learning

Identifiers

PMID35607616
PMCPMC9122967

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.