ArticleBMC public health2025
Exploring the potential and limitations of deep learning and explainable AI for longitudinal life course analysis.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The role of AI-assisted drug repurposing in neurological disorders: a systematic review of validation strategies, challenges and opportunities.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Pooled it
- Development and Evaluation of an Adaptive Penguin-Improved LSTM Model Integrating Natural Language Processing for Early Prediction of Pregnancy Syndrome Risks.Birth defects research · 2026Observational
- Multi-Omics and Artificial Intelligence in Cardiovascular Medicine: From Mechanistic Insights to Clinical Translation.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Causal AI in Cardiac Arrhythmia: From Pattern Recognition to Mechanistic Insight.Clinical cardiology · 2026Review
- Predicting cardiovascular diseases using imbalanced data: An XGBoost-based analysis of the 2022 BRFSS dataset.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2026Article
- System architecture and interactive LLM prompt framework for the integration of clinical and mitochondrial data in obesity: a software prototype and feasibility study.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- A generative AI multi-agent framework with integrated XAI governance for cancer diagnostics: from multi-omics interpretation to lifestyle risk stratification.Frontiers in systems biology · 2026Review
- Development and validation of an immune-related gene signature for the prognostic and immune landscape prediction in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma by integrated analysis of machine learning and Mendelian randomization.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding the complex interplay between life course exposures, such as adverse childhood experiences and environmental factors, and disease risk is essential for developing effective public health interventions. Traditional epidemiological methods, such as regression models and risk scoring, are limited in their ability to capture the non-linear and temporally dynamic nature of these relationships. Deep learning (DL) and explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) are increasingly applied within healthcare settings to identify influential risk factors and enable personalised interventions. However, significant gaps remain in understanding their utility and limitations, especially for sparse longitudinal life course data and how the influential patterns identified using explainability are linked to underlying causal mechanisms.
methodsWe conducted a controlled simulation study to assess the performance of various state-of-the-art DL architectures including CNNs and (attention-based) RNNs against XGBoost and logistic regression. Input data was simulated to reflect a generic and generalisable scenario with different rules used to generate multiple realistic outcomes based upon epidemiological concepts. Multiple metrics were used to assess model performance in the presence of class imbalance and SHAP values were calculated.
resultsWe find that DL methods can accurately detect dynamic relationships that baseline linear models and tree-based methods cannot. However, there is no one model that consistently outperforms the others across all scenarios. We further identify the superior performance of DL models in handling sparse feature availability over time compared to traditional machine learning approaches. Additionally, we examine the interpretability provided by SHAP values, demonstrating that these explanations often misalign with causal relationships, despite excellent predictive and calibrative performance.
conclusionsThese insights provide a foundation for future research applying DL and XAI to life course data, highlighting the challenges associated with sparse healthcare data, and the critical need for advancing interpretability frameworks in personalised public health.
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.