ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2026
Counterfactual Reasoning for Mammogram Classification via Semantic Texture Masking.
Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Artificial intelligence-based computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) systems have seen growing adoption in mammography, yet the limited interpretability of their decision-making processes remains a barrier to clinical trust. The present study aimed to investigate whether deep learning classifiers primarily rely on the characteristics of lesions or the surrounding breast tissue through a counterfactual reasoning, specifically using semantic masking in mammogram texture. We modified a part of mammograms by selectively removing texture information from lesion (foreground, FG) or non-lesion (background, BG) regions, replacing it with the mean image intensity, resulting in four scenarios involving benign and malignant foreground or background alterations. MobileNet, ResNet50, and ResNet50v2 were trained and evaluated on the CBIS-DDSM dataset; the area under the ROC curve (AUC) was used for assessing classification performance. All models had similar performance (AUCs = 0.74, 0.72, and 0.78, pairwise p-value > 0.05) on the original unaltered test set. Performance results differed dramatically under the above four masking scenarios: ResNet50 went completely wrong (AUC = 0.20, p-value < 0.0001) when malignant background information was removed, proving strong dependence on background context and difficulty focusing on subtle lesion features, while ResNet50v2 showed improved robustness (albeit its performance was severely impacted) for the same changes (AUC = 0.53, p-value < 0.0001), suggesting better preservation of lesion-level information. MobileNet was relatively stable across all masking scenarios, indicating robustness to region-specific changes. Understanding such region-specific dependencies can enhance model interpretability and support the development of more robust and reliable CADx systems for clinical use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42050080What 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.