ArticleFrontiers in digital health2023
Embracing the uncertainty in human-machine collaboration to support clinical decision-making for mental health conditions.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence-based risk assessment tools for sexual, reproductive and mental health: a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Pooled it
- A scoping review of human-AI collaboration patterns and task divisions in healthcare applications.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence for American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification: Agreement with Clinician Consensus and Temporal Stability Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Uncertainty modeling in multimodal speech analysis across the psychosis spectrum.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Applications of artificial intelligence in non-small cell lung cancer: from precision diagnosis to personalized prognosis and therapy.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Review
- Towards Trustworthy AI in Healthcare: Epistemic Uncertainty Estimation for Clinical Decision Support.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- Modeling disagreement in automatic data labeling for semi-supervised learning in Clinical Natural Language Processing.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two significant obstacles exist preventing the widespread usage of Deep Learning (DL) models for predicting healthcare outcomes in general and mental health conditions in particular. Firstly, DL models do not quantify the uncertainty in their predictions, so clinicians are unsure of which predictions they can trust. Secondly, DL models do not triage, i.e., separate which cases could be best handled by the human or the model. This paper attempts to address these obstacles using Bayesian Deep Learning (BDL), which extends DL probabilistically and allows us to quantify the model's uncertainty, which we use to improve human-model collaboration. We implement a range of state-of-the-art DL models for Natural Language Processing and apply a range of BDL methods to these models. Taking a step closer to the real-life scenarios of human-AI collaboration, we propose a Referral Learning methodology for the models that make predictions for certain instances while referring the rest of the instances to a human expert for further assessment. The study demonstrates that models can significantly enhance their performance by seeking human assistance in cases where the model exhibits high uncertainty, which is closely linked to misclassifications. Referral Learning offers two options: (1) supporting humans in cases where the model predicts with certainty, and (2) triaging cases where the model evaluated when it had a better chance of being right than the human by evaluating human disagreement. The latter method combines model uncertainty from BDL and human disagreement from multiple annotations, resulting in improved triaging capabilities.
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.