ArticlePloS one2024
Development of an ensemble CNN model with explainable AI for the classification of gastrointestinal cancer.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Opportunities and challenges of artificial intelligence-assisted endoscopy and high-quality data for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Review
- Lung cancer risk prediction using interpretable ensemble models on lifestyle and clinical data.PloS one · 2026Article
- Patient-centered gastrointestinal function assessment technologies: a paradigm shift from traditional approaches to non-invasive innovations.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Multi-Omics for Predicting Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Response and Resistance.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
- Review
- AI-driven virtual cell models in preclinical research: technical pathways, validation mechanisms, and clinical translation potential.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Application of Explainable Artificial Intelligence Based on Visual Explanation in Digestive Endoscopy.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Explainable AI in Clinical Decision Support Systems: A Meta-Analysis of Methods, Applications, and Usability Challenges.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Interpretable deep learning for gastric cancer detection: a fusion of AI architectures and explainability analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence and pediatric surgery: where are we?Pediatric surgery international · 2024Review
- AI-Powered Insights into Drug Resistance in Gastric Cancer: A Path Toward Precision Therapy.Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPRReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The implementation of AI assisted cancer detection systems in clinical environments has faced numerous hurdles, mainly because of the restricted explainability of their elemental mechanisms, even though such detection systems have proven to be highly effective. Medical practitioners are skeptical about adopting AI assisted diagnoses as due to the latter's inability to be transparent about decision making processes. In this respect, explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) has emerged to provide explanations for model predictions, thereby overcoming the computational black box problem associated with AI systems. In this particular research, the focal point has been the exploration of the Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) and local interpretable model-agnostic explanations (LIME) approaches which enable model prediction explanations. This study used an ensemble model consisting of three convolutional neural networks(CNN): InceptionV3, InceptionResNetV2 and VGG16, which was based on averaging techniques and by combining their respective predictions. These models were trained on the Kvasir dataset, which consists of pathological findings related to gastrointestinal cancer. An accuracy of 96.89% and F1-scores of 96.877% were attained by our ensemble model. Following the training of the ensemble model, we employed SHAP and LIME to analyze images from the three classes, aiming to provide explanations regarding the deterministic features influencing the model's predictions. The results obtained from this analysis demonstrated a positive and encouraging advancement in the exploration of XAI approaches, specifically in the context of gastrointestinal cancer detection within the healthcare domain.
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.