ReviewPatterns (New York, N.Y.)2022
Human-centered explainability for life sciences, healthcare, and medical informatics.
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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- The explainable AI dilemma under knowledge imbalance in specialist AI for glaucoma referrals in primary care.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Explainable Machine Learning for the Early Clinical Detection of Ovarian Cancer Using Contrastive Explanations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Use of Digitalisation and Machine Learning Techniques in Therapeutic Intervention at Early Ages: Supervised and Unsupervised Analysis.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- From Machine Learning to Patient Outcomes: A Comprehensive Review of AI in Pancreatic Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- The application of artificial intelligence in diabetic retinopathy: progress and prospects.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024Review
- Failure Modes of Time Series Interpretability Algorithms for Critical Care Applications and Potential Solutions.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024Article
- Text-based predictions of COVID-19 diagnosis from self-reported chemosensory descriptions.Communications medicine · 2023Article
- Assessment of Performance, Interpretability, and Explainability in Artificial Intelligence-Based Health Technologies: What Healthcare Stakeholders Need to Know.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2023Review
- Deep learning interpretability in neuroimaging: A comprehensive survey and methodological recommendations.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.