ArticleYonago acta medica2025
Utilization of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)-Powered Computer-Aided Detection (CAD) System on Chest X-Ray Abnormalities in Health Check-Ups.
Article in Yonago acta medica, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We designed a single-center retrospective study comparing the performance of commercially explainable artificial intelligence (XAI)-powered computer-aided detection (CAD) system of abnormal findings on chest X-rays (CXR) with that of non-experts, and pulmonology experts. Methods: A total of 1,262 images of 1,262 subjects (mean age 49 years; 52% female) and 1,252 images of 1,252 subjects (mean age 51 years; 51% female) were obtained from DICOM formats in Hakuai Hospital Health Check-up Center, in the pre-and post-implementing XAI-powered CAD period, respectively. The ultimate decision of abnormality on CXR was made by two pulmonology experts. The diagnostic accuracy metrics were measured accuracy and negative predictive value (NPV) for detecting abnormality on CXR. Results: XAI-powered CAD systems achieved an accuracy of 0.84 (95% confidential interval [CI] 0.82-0.86) and NPV of 1.00 (95% CI 0.99-1.00) to detect the abnormality on CXR. For determining nodular shadows, it was found to be non-inferior to the pulmonology experts with an accuracy of 0.94 (95% CI 0.92-0.95), and NPV of 1.00 (95% CI 0.99-1.00). It tended to overestimate the abnormality of heart enlargement and pleural thickening with a tendency for lower sensitivity. Conclusion: It seems likely that in the future, the most accurate screening CXR will be a double check combining with the pulmonology experts with XAI-powered CAD systems.
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.