ArticleScientific reports2023
Human-machine cooperation meta-model for clinical diagnosis by adaptation to human expert's diagnostic characteristics.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Temporal and Behaviour-Aware Multimodal Modelling for Hour-Ahead Hypoglycaemia Prediction During Ramadan Fasting in Type 1 Diabetes.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Virtual medicine: medical AI in human health and diseases.Military Medical Research · 2026Review
- Article
- Enhancing skin lesion classification: a CNN approach with human baseline comparison.PeerJ. Computer science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) using deep learning approaches the capabilities of human experts in medical image diagnosis. However, due to liability issues in medical decisions, AI is often relegated to an assistant role. Based on this responsibility constraint, the effective use of AI to assist human intelligence in real-world clinics remains a challenge. Given the significant inter-individual variations in clinical decisions among physicians based on their expertise, AI needs to adapt to individual experts, complementing weaknesses and enhancing strengths. For this adaptation, AI should not only acquire domain knowledge but also understand the specific human experts it assists. This study introduces a meta-model for human-machine cooperation that first evaluates each expert's class-specific diagnostic tendencies using conditional probability, based on which the meta-model adjusts the AI's predictions. This meta-model was applied to ear disease diagnosis using otoendoscopy, highlighting improved performance when incorporating individual diagnostic characteristics, even with limited evaluation data. The highest accuracy was achieved by combining each expert's conditional probabilities with machine classification probability, using optimal weights specific to each individual's overall classification accuracy. This tailored model aims to mitigate potential misjudgments due to psychological effects caused by machine suggestions and to capitalize on the unique expertise of individual clinicians.
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.