ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026
Explainable AI-based clinical decision support system for flatfoot classification using deep learning.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Flatfoot, also known as pes planus, is a deformity of the foot characterized by a decrease or absence of the medial longitudinal arch, which may lead to postural and locomotion abnormalities. Methods: This study presents a comparative analysis of handcrafted feature-based machine learning (LBP with Random Forest, Decision Tree, Logistic Regression) and deep learning models (InceptionResNetV2, ResNet101V2, DenseNet201, DenseNet169, InceptionV3, Xception) for flatfoot classification. Monte Carlo cross-validation was employed with subject-wise splitting. SHAP and Grad-CAM were used for explainability. Results: Random Forest achieved 70% accuracy with LBP features. ResNet101V2-RMSprop achieved 92.86% ± 2.82% mean accuracy and 98.21% best single-run accuracy. Deep features with Decision Tree achieved 97% accuracy, 95% recall, and 100% specificity. Discussion: SHAP and Grad-CAM confirmed that the model focuses on clinically relevant regions: the medial longitudinal arch and calcaneus for pes planus, and the talus-navicular region for normal feet. The hybrid approach is suitable for clinical screening.
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.