ArticleJAMIA open2025
Explaining care need assessment surveys: qualitative and quantitative evaluation of state-of-the-art local and global explainable artificial intelligence methods.
Article in JAMIA open, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: With extended life expectancy, the number of people in need of care has been growing. To optimally support them, it is important to know the patterns and conditions of their daily life that influence the need for support, and thus, the classification of the care need. In this study, we aim to utilize a large corpus consisting of care benefits applications to do an explorative analysis of factors affecting care need to support the tedious work of experts gathering reliable criteria for a care need assessment. Materials and Methods: We compare state-of-the-art methods from explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) as means to extract such patterns from over 72 000 German care benefits applications. We train transformer models to predict assessment results as decided by a Medical Service Unit from accompanying text notes. To understand the key factors for care need assessment and its constituent modules (such as mobility and self-therapy), we apply feature attribution methods to extract the key phrases for each prediction. These local explanations are then aggregated into global insights to derive key phrases for different modules and severity of care need over the dataset. Results: Our experiments show that transformers-based models perform slightly better than traditional bag-of-words baselines in predicting care need. We find that the bag-of-words baseline also provides useful care-relevant phrases, whereas phrases obtained through transformer explanations better balance rare and common phrases, such as diagnoses mentioned only once, and are better in assigning the correct assessment module. Discussion: Even though XAI results can become unwieldy, they let us get an understanding of thousands of documents with no extra annotations other than existing assessment outcomes. Conclusion: This work provides a systematic application and comparison of both traditional and state-of-the-art deep learning based XAI approaches to extract insights from a large corpus of text. Both traditional and deep learning approaches provide useful phrases, and we recommend using both to explore and understand large text corpora better. We will make our code available at https://github.com/oguzserbetci/explainer.
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.