ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Interpretable Skin Cancer Identification Using a Hybrid Deep Learning and XAI Framework on HAM10000.
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.
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.
- Automated Skin Lesion and Cancer Detection Using Computer Vision: A Comprehensive Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.