Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40233316›Full record

ArticlePLOS digital health2025

A comparative study of explainability methods for whole slide classification of lymph node metastases using vision transformers.

Jens Rahnfeld, Mehdi Naouar, Gabriel Kalweit, Joschka Boedecker, Estelle Dubruc, Maria Kalweit

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Jens RahnfeldCollaborative Research Institute Intelligent Oncology (CRIION), Freiburg, Germany.
Mehdi NaouarCollaborative Research Institute Intelligent Oncology (CRIION), Freiburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-1557-2223
Gabriel KalweitCollaborative Research Institute Intelligent Oncology (CRIION), Freiburg, Germany.
Joschka BoedeckerCollaborative Research Institute Intelligent Oncology (CRIION), Freiburg, Germany.
Estelle DubrucDepartment of Pathology, University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Maria KalweitCollaborative Research Institute Intelligent Oncology (CRIION), Freiburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4581-8810

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advancements in deep learning have shown promise in enhancing the performance of medical image analysis. In pathology, automated whole slide imaging has transformed clinical workflows by streamlining routine tasks and diagnostic and prognostic support. However, the lack of transparency of deep learning models, often described as black boxes, poses a significant barrier to their clinical adoption. This study evaluates various explainability methods for Vision Transformers, assessing their effectiveness in explaining the rationale behind their classification predictions on histopathological images. Using a Vision Transformer trained on the publicly available CAMELYON16 dataset comprising of 399 whole slide images of lymph node metastases of patients with breast cancer, we conducted a comparative analysis of a diverse range of state-of-the-art techniques for generating explanations through heatmaps, including Attention Rollout, Integrated Gradients, RISE, and ViT-Shapley. Our findings reveal that Attention Rollout and Integrated Gradients are prone to artifacts, while RISE and particularly ViT-Shapley generate more reliable and interpretable heatmaps. ViT-Shapley also demonstrated faster runtime and superior performance in insertion and deletion metrics. These results suggest that integrating ViT-Shapley-based heatmaps into pathology reports could enhance trust and scalability in clinical workflows, facilitating the adoption of explainable artificial intelligence in pathology.

Identifiers

PMID40233316
PMCPMC11999707

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.