ArticleBMC medical imaging2026
Interpretable deep learning radiomics from
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo develop and validate interpretable models integrating standardized uptake value (SUV), radiomics (Rad), and deep learning (DL) features from 18F-FDG PET/CT for differentiating diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and follicular lymphoma (FL).
methodsThis retrospective study included 250 patients from two centers. Volumes of interest (VOIs) were delineated on PET images for SUV, Rad, and DL features extraction. Feature selection was performed using the Mann–Whitney U test, random forest–based recursive feature elimination, and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO). Seven machine learning classifiers were applied to construct diagnostic models, and fused Rad and DL features were further integrated to construct deep learning radiomics (DLR) models. Model interpretability was assessed using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). Model performance was evaluated in terms of discrimination, calibration, and clinical applicability.
resultsThe DLR model achieved the best diagnostic performance, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.905 and an accuracy of 0.813 in the testing cohort. SHAP analysis identified the Rad feature “original_Maximum” as the most influential predictor for differentiating DLBCL from FL. Calibration curve and decision curve analyses further supported the superiority of the DLR model.
conclusionRad and DL features derived from 18F-FDG PET/CT enable effective differentiation between DLBCL and FL. The proposed SHAP-based interpretable model offers superior diagnostic accuracy and potential clinical utility.
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.