Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38581138›Full record

Trial reportAnnals of clinical and translational neurology2024

Effects of explainable artificial intelligence in neurology decision support.

Grace Y Gombolay, Andrew Silva, Mariah Schrum, Nakul Gopalan, Jamika Hallman-Cooper, Monideep Dutt, Matthew Gombolay

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Annals of clinical and translational neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Explainability in AI-enabled medical neurotechnology: a scoping review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Machine learning in healthcare citizen science: A scoping review.International journal of medical informatics · 2025
    Article
  11. 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

7 authors.

Grace Y Gombolay *Department of Pediatrics, Division of Neurology, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4830-7792
Andrew SilvaGeorgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Mariah SchrumGeorgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Nakul GopalanArizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Jamika Hallman-CooperDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Neurology, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Monideep DuttDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Neurology, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Matthew Gombolay *Department of Pediatrics, Division of Neurology, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Funding

Implementing a Maternal health and PRegnancy Outcomes Vision for Everyone (IMPROVE)UL1TR002378 · NCATS · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Andres J Garcia, Elizabeth O. Ofili · 2017 to 2026
$92.1M
Institutional Career Development CoreKL2TR002381 · NCATS · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI HENRY M BLUMBERG, Anandi Nayan Sheth · 2017 to 2026
$14.1M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR002381NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002378NIH HHS KL2TR002381NIH HHS UL1TR002378
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveArtificial intelligence (AI)-based decision support systems (DSS) are utilized in medicine but underlying decision-making processes are usually unknown. Explainable AI (xAI) techniques provide insight into DSS, but little is known on how to design xAI for clinicians. Here we investigate the impact of various xAI techniques on a clinician's interaction with an AI-based DSS in decision-making tasks as compared to a general population.

methodsWe conducted a randomized, blinded study in which members of the Child Neurology Society and American Academy of Neurology were compared to a general population. Participants received recommendations from a DSS via a random assignment of an xAI intervention (decision tree, crowd sourced agreement, case-based reasoning, probability scores, counterfactual reasoning, feature importance, templated language, and no explanations). Primary outcomes included test performance and perceived explainability, trust, and social competence of the DSS. Secondary outcomes included compliance, understandability, and agreement per question.

resultsWe had 81 neurology participants with 284 in the general population. Decision trees were perceived as the more explainable by the medical versus general population (P < 0.01) and as more explainable than probability scores within the medical population (P < 0.001). Increasing neurology experience and perceived explainability degraded performance (P = 0.0214). Performance was not predicted by xAI method but by perceived explainability.

interpretationxAI methods have different impacts on a medical versus general population; thus, xAI is not uniformly beneficial, and there is no one-size-fits-all approach. Further user-centered xAI research targeting clinicians and to develop personalized DSS for clinicians is needed.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDecision Support Systems, ClinicalNeurologyAdultClinical Decision-MakingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID38581138
PMCPMC11093252

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.