ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2024
Beyond black-box models: explainable AI for embryo ploidy prediction and patient-centric consultation.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bioinformatics and multi-omics approaches in male infertility: implications for diagnosis and assisted reproduction.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Review
- Determinants and Machine Learning Prediction of Subtherapeutic Sodium Valproate Concentrations in Epilepsy Management in Xinjiang, China.European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics · 2026Article
- Explainable Artificial Intelligence in Assisted Reproductive Technology: Bridging Prediction and Clinical Judgment.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Investigating discrepancies in accuracy, agreement and interpretability for single-frame embryo classification tasks conducted by embryologists and deep learning models.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Article
- Non-invasive prediction of human embryonic ploidy using artificial intelligence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo determine if an explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) model enhances the accuracy and transparency of predicting embryo ploidy status based on embryonic characteristics and clinical data.
methodsThis retrospective study utilized a dataset of 1908 blastocyst embryos. The dataset includes ploidy status, morphokinetic features, morphology grades, and 11 clinical variables. Six machine learning (ML) models including Random Forest (RF), Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA), Logistic Regression (LR), Support Vector Machine (SVM), AdaBoost (ADA), and Light Gradient-Boosting Machine (LGBM) were trained to predict ploidy status probabilities across three distinct datasets: high-grade embryos (HGE, n = 1107), low-grade embryos (LGE, n = 364), and all-grade embryos (AGE, n = 1471). The model's performance was interpreted using XAI, including SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) and Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations (LIME) techniques.
resultsThe mean maternal age was 38.5 ± 3.85 years. The Random Forest (RF) model exhibited superior performance compared to the other five ML models, achieving an accuracy of 0.749 and an AUC of 0.808 for AGE. In the external test set, the RF model achieved an accuracy of 0.714 and an AUC of 0.750 (95% CI, 0.702-0.796). SHAP's feature impact analysis highlighted that maternal age, paternal age, time to blastocyst (tB), and day 5 morphology grade significantly impacted the predictive model. In addition, LIME offered specific case-ploidy prediction probabilities, revealing the model's assigned values for each variable within a finite range.
conclusionThe model highlights the potential of using XAI algorithms to enhance ploidy prediction, optimize embryo selection as patient-centric consultation, and provides reliability and transparent insights into the decision-making process.
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.