ArticleScientific reports2025
A novel XAI framework for explainable AI-ECG using generative counterfactual XAI (GCX).
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in the Interpretation of the Electrocardiogram by Artificial Intelligence.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Advances in Electrocardiogram-Based Non-Invasive Blood Glucose Monitoring Technology.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Review
- Signal or noise? Evaluating commonly used attribution methods for explaining deep neural networks in electrocardiogram classification.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Electrocardiography in Practice: A State-of-the-Art Review.Korean circulation journal · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence for Cardiovascular Care in Action: From Learning to Implementation in Health Systems.JACC. Advances · 2025Review
- Federated multimodal AI for precision-equitable diabetes care.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Generative Counterfactual Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) offers a novel approach to understanding how AI models interpret electrocardiograms (ECGs). Traditional explanation methods focus on highlighting important ECG segments but often fail to clarify why these segments matter or how their alteration affects model predictions. In contrast, the proposed framework explores "what-if" scenarios, generating counterfactual ECGs that increase or decrease a model's predictive values. This approach has the potential to increase clinicians' trust specific changes-such as increased T wave amplitude or PR interval prolongation-influence the model's decisions. Through a series of validation experiments, the framework demonstrates its ability to produce counterfactual ECGs that closely align with established clinical knowledge, including characteristic alterations associated with potassium imbalances and atrial fibrillation. By clearly visualizing how incremental modifications in ECG morphology and rhythm affect artificial intelligence-applied ECG (AI-ECG) predictions, this generative counterfactual method moves beyond static attribution maps and has the potential to increase clinicians' trust in AI-ECG systems. As a result, this approach offers a promising path toward enhancing the explainability and clinical reliability of AI-based tools for cardiovascular diagnostics.
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.