SynthesisSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Demystifying Artificial Intelligence: A Systematic Review of Explainable Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging.
Synthesis in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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.
- Recent advances in artificial intelligence across interventional pulmonology: a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
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
Abstract
This comprehensive literature review explores the latest advancements in explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) techniques within the field of medical imaging (MI). Over the past decade, machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) technologies have made significant strides in healthcare, enabling advancements in tasks such as disease diagnosis, medical image segmentation, and the detection of various medical conditions. However, despite these successes, the widespread adoption of AI-driven tools in clinical practice remains slow, primarily due to the "black-box" nature of many AI models. These models make decisions without transparent reasoning, which poses significant barriers in critical medical and legal environments, where accountability and trust are paramount. This review investigates various XAI methods, focusing on both intrinsic and post-hoc techniques, to evaluate their potential in addressing these challenges. The paper examines how XAI can enhance the transparency of healthcare algorithms, thereby fostering greater trust and confidence among clinicians, patients, and regulators. Key challenges faced by XAI in healthcare, such as limited interpretability, computational complexity, and the absence of standardized evaluation frameworks, are discussed in detail. Furthermore, this work highlights existing gaps in the literature, including the lack of detailed comparative analyses of specific XAI techniques, especially in terms of their mathematical foundations and applicability across diverse medical imaging contexts. In response to these gaps, the paper introduces a new set of standardized evaluation metrics aimed at assessing XAI performance across various medical imaging tasks, such as image segmentation, classification, and diagnosis. The review proposes actionable recommendations for enhancing the effectiveness of XAI in healthcare, with a focus on real-world clinical applications. Unlike previous studies that focus on broader overviews or limited subsets of methods, this work provides a comprehensive comparative analysis of over 18 XAI techniques, emphasizing their strengths, weaknesses, and practical implications. By offering a detailed understanding of how XAI methods can be integrated into clinical workflows, this paper aims to bridge the gap between cutting-edge AI technologies and their practical use in medical settings. Ultimately, the insights provided are valuable for researchers, clinicians, and industry professionals, encouraging the adoption and standardization of XAI practices in clinical environments, thus ensuring the successful integration of transparent, interpretable, and reliable AI systems into healthcare.
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.