Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39257419›Full record

ReviewResearch (Washington, D.C.)2024

Causal Inference Meets Deep Learning: A Comprehensive Survey.

Licheng Jiao, Yuhan Wang, Xu Liu, Lingling Li, Fang Liu, Wenping Ma, Yuwei Guo, Puhua Chen, Shuyuan Yang, Biao Hou

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Research (Washington, D.C.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Foundation Models Meet Medical Image Interpretation.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2026
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. A neuromuscular clinician's primer on machine learning.Journal of neuromuscular diseases · 2026
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

10 authors.

Licheng JiaoThe School of Artificial Intelligence, Xidian University, Xi'an, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3354-9617
Yuhan WangThe School of Artificial Intelligence, Xidian University, Xi'an, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7243-9341
Xu LiuThe School of Artificial Intelligence, Xidian University, Xi'an, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8780-5455
Lingling LiThe School of Artificial Intelligence, Xidian University, Xi'an, China.
Fang LiuThe School of Artificial Intelligence, Xidian University, Xi'an, China.
Wenping MaThe School of Artificial Intelligence, Xidian University, Xi'an, China.
Yuwei GuoThe School of Artificial Intelligence, Xidian University, Xi'an, China.
Puhua ChenThe School of Artificial Intelligence, Xidian University, Xi'an, China.
Shuyuan YangThe School of Artificial Intelligence, Xidian University, Xi'an, China.
Biao HouThe School of Artificial Intelligence, Xidian University, Xi'an, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning relies on learning from extensive data to generate prediction results. This approach may inadvertently capture spurious correlations within the data, leading to models that lack interpretability and robustness. Researchers have developed more profound and stable causal inference methods based on cognitive neuroscience. By replacing the correlation model with a stable and interpretable causal model, it is possible to mitigate the misleading nature of spurious correlations and overcome the limitations of model calculations. In this survey, we provide a comprehensive and structured review of causal inference methods in deep learning. Brain-like inference ideas are discussed from a brain-inspired perspective, and the basic concepts of causal learning are introduced. The article describes the integration of causal inference with traditional deep learning algorithms and illustrates its application to large model tasks as well as specific modalities in deep learning. The current limitations of causal inference and future research directions are discussed. Moreover, the commonly used benchmark datasets and the corresponding download links are summarized.

Identifiers

PMID39257419
PMCPMC11384545

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.