ArticleScientific reports2026
A multimodal explainable artificial intelligence framework for interpretable Parkinson's disease prediction.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a complex neurological disorder that is difficult to diagnose at an early stage. Early diagnosis and prediction of the disease can help improve the prognosis of patients and therapeutic interventions. Although machine learning (ML) has shown strong potential for PD diagnosis and prediction, its clinical use is limited by the lack of model interpretability. In this study, advanced but interpretable framework is proposed for Parkinson’s disease diagnosis by incorporating explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) and machine learning methods. The proposed framework estimates the probability of PD with concise and clinically relevant explanations using heterogeneous data, including neuroimaging, motor and non-motor symptoms, and clinical features. Several ML classifiers, including support vector machines, random forests, k-nearest neighbors, and decision trees, are equipped with XAI methods, SHAP and LIME, to provide better interpretability. Under the proposed framework, the ML models demonstrated better predictive performance than classic ML models. AdaBoost achieved the best performance with an accuracy of 93%, precision of 90%, recall of 90%, a F1-score of 90%, and an AUC of 0.95, representing an improvement of approximately %0.75 in accuracy over the best-performing baseline model. In addition, local and global explanations are provided by LIME, SHAP, and ELI5 to identify essential neuroimaging and clinical features. In summary, this study provides clinical validation for AI by achieving a trade-off between predictive accuracy and interpretability, to aid early diagnosis and personalized treatment of Parkinson’s Disease.
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.