Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42351921›Full record

ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2026

Interpretable Skin Cancer Identification Using a Hybrid Deep Learning and XAI Framework on HAM10000.

Bhagyashri S Sonune, R Udaya Kumar, K Sankar, Puja S Agrawal, Shon G Nemane, Dhiraj P Tulaskar, Manish Bhaiyya, Madhusudan B Kulkarni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioengineering (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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Bhagyashri S SonuneDepartment of Computer Science, Kalinga University, Raipur 492101, Chhattisgarh, India.
R Udaya KumarDepartment of Computer Science, Kalinga University, Raipur 492101, Chhattisgarh, India.
K SankarDepartment of Artificial Intelligence and Data Science, Vel Tech High Tech Dr.Rangarajan Dr.Sakunthala Engineering College, Avadi, Chennai 600062, Tamil Nadu, India.ORCID 0000-0002-0120-6575
Puja S AgrawalDepartment of Electronics and Communication Engineering, School of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Ramdeobaba University, Nagpur 440013, Maharashtra, India.ORCID 0009-0006-6137-4171
Shon G NemaneDepartment of Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering, Shri Sant Gajanan Maharaj College of Engineering, Shegaon 444203, Maharashtra, India.ORCID 0009-0000-8898-3758
Dhiraj P TulaskarDepartment of Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering, Shri Sant Gajanan Maharaj College of Engineering, Shegaon 444203, Maharashtra, India.ORCID 0000-0001-6540-2471
Manish BhaiyyaDepartment of Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering, Shri Sant Gajanan Maharaj College of Engineering, Shegaon 444203, Maharashtra, India.
Madhusudan B KulkarniManipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), Manipal 576104, Karnataka, India.ORCID 0000-0002-2911-3784

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning-based automated classification of dermatoscopic skin lesions has exhibited promising potential in diagnostics. However, two prominent issues need to be addressed before achieving high-quality diagnostic tools: inconsistent performance in the case of imbalanced classes and poor clinical interpretability of models. Even though some studies have attempted to leverage both deep and shallow learning by combining pretrained convolutional neural networks (CNNs)-based feature extraction with classical machine learning (ML) models, very few of them systematically explore several model combinations based on various clinically important metrics, such as F1-score, precision, recall, accuracy, etc., and utilize decision threshold calibration techniques. In this research, we present an evaluation of a systematic framework with threshold calibration for the comparison of several hybrid models on seven-class skin lesion classification (multi-class) on the HAM10000 dataset. In particular, we used deep features extracted from three pretrained CNN architectures, i.e., DenseNet201, InceptionV3 and EfficientNet-B4. These deep features were used as inputs for six different classical classifiers. As a result, we obtained 18 comparable hybrid models that were then systematically compared by multiple clinically relevant metrics: accuracy, macro-precision, macro-recall, macro-F1, ROC-AUC, Precision-Recall-AUC, and log loss. Also, fold-wise optimization of decision thresholds was performed, which was based on the maximization of the macro-F1 score. Finally, we found out that DenseNet201 with an SVM-RBF classifier yielded the highest performance among all 18 tested models, showing 90.88% accuracy, 90.7% macro-precision, and 0.921 ROC-AUC. To analyze the clinical plausibility, top-performing models were further explained with explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) techniques: Grad-CAM, LIME and Occlusion Sensitivity. Results show that the most successful models concentrated mostly on lesion-specific areas. Overall, this study contributes a reproducible hybrid-XAI model-selection framework rather than a single black-box classifier, supporting more transparent and clinically meaningful skin lesion diagnosis.

Indexed as

cancer detectionconvolutional neural networks (CNNs)deep learning (DL)explainable artificial intelligence (XAI)image analysismachine learning (ML)skin lesion classification

Identifiers

PMID42351921
PMCPMC13295699

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.