ArticlePacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing2025
A Visual Analytics Framework for Assessing Interactive AI for Clinical Decision Support.
Article in Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Human involvement remains critical in most instances of clinical decision-making. Recent advances in AI and machine learning opened the door for designing, implementing, and translating interactive AI systems to support clinicians in decision-making. Assessing the impact and implications of such systems on patient care and clinical workflows requires in-depth studies. Conducting evaluation studies of AI-supported interactive systems to support decision-making in clinical settings is challenging and time-consuming. These studies involve carefully collecting, analyzing, and interpreting quantitative and qualitative data to assess the performance of the underlying AI-supported system, its impact on the human decision-making process, and the implications for patient care. We have previously developed a toolkit for designing and implementing clinical AI software so that it can be subjected to an application-based evaluation. Here, we present a visual analytics frame-work for analyzing and interpreting the data collected during such an evaluation process. Our framework supports identifying subgroups of users and patients based on their characteristics, detecting outliers among them, and providing evidence to ensure adherence to regulatory guidelines. We used early-stage clinical AI regulatory guidelines to drive the system design, implemented multiple-factor analysis and hierarchical clustering as exemplary analysis tools, and provided interactive visualizations to explore and interpret results. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our framework through a case study to evaluate a prototype AI-based clinical decision-support system for diagnosing pediatric brain tumors.
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.