ReviewInternational urology and nephrology2026
From black box to glass box: explainable artificial intelligence for acute kidney injury prediction-a scoping review and the GLASS-AKI translational framework proposal.
Review in International urology and nephrology, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundArtificial intelligence models for acute kidney injury (AKI) prediction achieve strong discriminative accuracy, yet clinical adoption remains constrained by model opacity and alarm fatigue. Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) methods may enhance clinician trust and alert acceptance; however, the extent of their clinical validation and implementation remains unclear.
methodsWe performed a scoping review following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Digital Library were searched from January 2012 through February 2026. Studies applying XAI methods to AKI prediction or management in adult inpatients were eligible. Prediction model studies were appraised using PROBAST. We additionally propose the GLASS-AKI conceptual framework as a structured research agenda derived from identified gaps.
resultsThirty-four studies met inclusion criteria (total patient population > 2.1 million). SHAP-based attribution was the most frequently reported XAI technique (26/34; 76.5%), followed by LIME (9; 26.5%), attention-weight visualization (7; 20.6%), and rule-based surrogates (5; 14.7%). Reported AUROC values ranged from 0.71 to 0.95 (median 0.84). Critically, XAI was applied as a post hoc explanation method in 88.2% of studies and did not inherently alter model discriminative performance. Prospective clinical deployment data were limited to 4 studies (11.8%). PROBAST assessment identified high overall risk of bias in 79.4% of studies, predominantly in the Analysis domain. No study integrated multi-omic biomarker signals with real-time XAI reasoning at the point of care.
conclusionsXAI methods are increasingly applied to AKI prediction models, but prospective evidence linking explainability to improved clinician behavior or patient outcomes remains limited. We propose the GLASS-AKI framework as a conceptual research agenda-not a validated system-to guide future multicenter prospective evaluation of integrated XAI-biomarker approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42322494What 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.