ArticleAlgorithms2025
Synthesizing Explainability Across Multiple ML Models for Structured Data.
Article in Algorithms, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Identifying determinants of readmission and death post-stroke using explainable machine learning.PloS one · 2025Observational
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
Abstract
Explainable Machine Learning (XML) in high-stakes domains demands reproducible methods to aggregate feature importance across multiple models applied to the same structured dataset. We propose the Weighted Importance Score and Frequency Count (WISFC) framework, which combines importance magnitude and consistency by aggregating ranked outputs from diverse explainers. WISFC assigns a weighted score to each feature based on its rank and frequency across model-explainer pairs, providing a robust ensemble feature-importance ranking. Unlike simple consensus voting or ranking heuristics that are insufficient for capturing complex relationships among different explainer outputs, WISFC offers a more principled approach to reconciling and aggregating this information. By aggregating many "weak signals" from brute-force modeling runs, WISFC can surface a stronger consensus on which variables matter most. The framework is designed to be reproducible and generalizable, capable of taking important outputs from any set of machine-learning models and producing an aggregated ranking highlighting consistently important features. This approach acknowledges that any single model is a simplification of complex, multidimensional phenomena; using multiple diverse models, each optimized from a different perspective, WISFC systematically captures different facets of the problem space to create a more structured and comprehensive view. As a consequence, this study offers a useful strategy for researchers and practitioners who seek innovative ways of exploring complex systems, not by discovering entirely new variables but by introducing a novel mindset for systematically combining multiple modeling perspectives.
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.